Thiamethoxam; Pesticide Tolerance, 708-720 [05-89]
Download as PDF
708
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Executive Order 13132 requires
EPA to develop an accountable process
to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies
that have federalism implications’’ is
defined in the Executive Order to
include regulations that have
‘‘substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’ This final rule
directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers and food
retailers, not States. This action does not
alter the relationships or distribution of
power and responsibilities established
by Congress in the preemption
provisions of section 408(n)(4) of the
FFDCA. For these same reasons, the
Agency has determined that this rule
does not have any ‘‘tribal implications’’
as described in Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 6, 2000). Executive
Order 13175, requires EPA to develop
an accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal
officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal
implications’’ is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and the Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.’’ This
rule will not have substantial direct
effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
V. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
by the Food Quality Protection Act of
1996 (FQPA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
January 5, 2005. Objections and requests
for hearings must be received on or
before March 7, 2005.
ADDRESSES: To submit a written
objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in
Unit VI. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
INFORMATION. EPA has established a
Environmental protection,
docket for this action under Docket
Administrative practice and procedure,
identification (ID) number OPP–2004–
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
0394. All documents in the docket are
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping listed in the EDOCKET index at
requirements.
https://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although
listed in the index, some information is
Dated: December 20, 2004,
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
Lois Rossi,
information whose disclosure is
Director, Registration Division, Office of
restricted by statute. Certain other
Pesticide Programs.
material, such as copyrighted material,
I Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
is not placed on the Internet and will be
amended as follows:
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
PART 180—[AMENDED]
materials are available either
electronically in EDOCKET or in hard
I 1. The authority citation for part 180
copy at the Public Information and
continues to read as follows:
Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm.
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
119, Crystal Mall #2, 1801 South Bell
St., Arlington, VA. This docket facility
§ 180.275 [Amended]
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
I 2. In § 180.275, amend paragraph (b) by
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
revising the date ‘‘12/31/03’’ to read ‘‘12/
holidays. The docket telephone number
31/07.’’
is (703) 305–5805.
[FR Doc. 05–51 Filed 1–4–05; 8:45 am]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dani
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
Daniel, Registration Division (7505C),
Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
AGENCY
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–5409; e-mail address:
40 CFR Part 180
daniel.dani@epa.gov.
[OPP–2004–0394; FRL–7689–7]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of this final
rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Thiamethoxam; Pesticide Tolerance
I. General Information
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to:
• Crop production (NAICS 111), e.g.,
agricultural workers; greenhouse,
nursery, and floriculture workers;
farmers.
• Animal production (NAICS 112),
e.g., cattle ranchers and farmers, dairy
cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
• Food manufacturing (NAICS 311),
e.g., agricultural workers; farmers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture
workers; ranchers; pesticide applicators.
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
32532), e.g., agricultural workers;
commercial applicators; farmers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture
workers; residential users.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for combined residues of
thiamethoxam and its metabolite,
(CGA–322704) in or on legume
vegetables, root vegetables (except sugar
beet), strawberries, bushberries,
juneberries, lingonberries, salal,
cranberries, spearmint, peppermint,
rapeseed, mustard, flax, safflower,
crambe, borage, and potatoes. In
addition, the tolerance expression for
tuberous and corm vegetable crop
subgroup (1C) is revised to a tolerance
expression for tuberous and corm crop
subgroup (except potato) (1D). Syngenta
Crop Protection, Inc. and Interregional
Research Project 4 requested this
tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies
of This Document and Other Related
Information?
In addition to using EDOCKET
(https://www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may
access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. A
frequently updated electronic version of
40 CFR part 180 is available at E-CFR
Beta Site Two at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/. To access the
OPPTS Harmonized Guidelines
referenced in this document, go directly
to the guidelines at https://www.epa.gpo/
opptsfrs/home/guidelin.htm/.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of June 2, 2004
(69 FR 31110) (FRL–7361–1), EPA
issued a notice pursuant to section
408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of
pesticide petitions (PP 2E6363, 3E6781,
3E6800, 3E6805, 3E6806, 3E6807,
4E6819, and 0F6142) by Syngenta Crop
Protection, Inc., P.O. Box 18300
Greensboro, NC 27419–8300, and
Interregional Research Project 4 (IR–4),
681 US Highway 1 South, North
Brunswick, NJ 08902–3390. The
petitions requested that 40 CFR 180.565
be amended by establishing tolerances
for combined residues of the insecticide
thiamethoxam, 3-[(2-chloro-5thiazolyl)methyl]tetrahydro-5-methyl-Nnitro-4H-1,3,5-oxadiazin-4-imine and its
metabolite CGA-322704 (N-(2-chlorothiazol-5-ylmethyl)-N‘-methyl-N’‘-nitroguanidine), in or on legume vegetables
group 6 at 0.02 parts per million (ppm)
(3E6805), peppermint and spearmint at
4.0 ppm (2E6363); root vegetables
(except sugar beet) crop subgroup 1B at
0.1 ppm and for radish tops at 0.80 ppm
(4E6819); strawberry at 0.30 ppm
(3E6800); cranberry at 0.01 ppm
(3E6781); bushberry crop subgroup 13B
and juneberry, lingonberry and salal at
0.25 ppm (3E6807); rapeseed seed,
mustard seed, flax seed, safflower seed,
crambe seed, and borage seed at 0.02
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
ppm (3E6806); and potato at 0.25 ppm
(0F6142). In addition, due to the
establishment of the individual
tolerance for potato, it was requested
that the tolerance expression for
tuberous and corm crop subgroup 1C be
revised to a tolerance expression for
tuberous and corm (except potato) crop
subgroup 1D. That notice included a
summary of these petitions prepared by
Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. and IR4, the registrant. As a result of the
residue data submitted to support these
requests, the proposed tolerance level
for peppermint and spearmint was
subsequently revised to 1.5 ppm; the
proposed tolerance level for root
vegetables (except sugar beet) crop
subgroup 1B was subsequently revised
to 0.02 ppm; the proposed tolerance
level for bushberry crop subgroup 13B
and juneberry, lingonberry and salal
was subsequently revised to 0.20 ppm;
and the proposed tolerance for
cranberry was revised to 0.02 ppm.
There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. . . .’’
EPA performs a number of analyses to
determine the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide residues. For
further discussion of the regulatory
requirements of section 408 of FFDCA
and a complete description of the risk
assessment process, see the final rule on
Bifenthrin Pesticide Tolerances (62 FR
62961, November 26, 1997) (FRL–5754–
7).
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other
relevant information in support of this
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
709
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess
the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure,
consistent with section 408(b)(2) of
FFDCA, for a tolerance for combined
residues of thiamethoxam and its
metabolite CGA–322704 on legume
vegetables group 6 at 0.02 ppm,
peppermint and spearmint at 1.5 ppm;
root vegetables (except sugar beet) crop
subgroup 1B at 0.02 ppm and for radish
tops at 0.80 ppm; strawberry at 0.30
ppm; cranberry at 0.02 ppm; bushberry
crop subgroup 13B and juneberry,
lingonberry and salal at 0.20 ppm;
rapeseed seed, mustard seed, flax seed,
safflower seed, crambe seed, and borage
seed at 0.02 ppm; and potato at 0.25
ppm. In addition, due to the
establishment of the individual
tolerance for potato, it was requested
that the tolerance expression for
tuberous and corm crop subgroup 1C be
revised to a tolerance expression for
tuberous and corm (except potato) crop
subgroup 1D. EPA’s assessment of
exposures and risks associated with
establishing the tolerance follows.
In assessing the human health risks
associated with the existing and
proposed uses of thiamethoxam, EPA
has included exposure to thiamethoxam
as well as its metabolite CGA–322704
when evaluating exposure from the
dietary (food only) pathway. This
approach was developed when the
Agency received the first food-use
request for registration of thiamethoxam
and determined that the CGA–322704
metabolite/degradate, as well as the
parent compound, are residues of
concern in food; no exposure to CGA–
322704 in drinking water was
considered likely following application
of thiamethoxam. At the time,
toxicological information regarding
CGA–322704 was not available, and it
was assumed that thiamethoxam and
this metabolite are toxicologically
equivalent for estimation of dietary risk.
Subsequently, the Agency received a
petition requesting registration of the
insecticide clothianidin. Upon review of
that petition, the Agency discovered
that CGA–322704 and clothianidin are
identical. With the registration of
clothianidin uses, the Agency has
largely complete toxicological databases
for both thiamethoxam and CGA–
322704 (referred to in the remainder of
this rule as clothianidin). While some of
the toxic effects observed following
dosing with the two active ingredients
are similar, it is not clear that they are
toxicologically equivalent.
To date, the Agency has not formally
examined the toxicity data to determine
if it is appropriate to separate exposure
to the parent compound thiamethoxam
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
710
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
from exposure to thiamethoxam’s
metabolite clothianidin when assessing
the aggregate risk associated with
thiamethoxam tolerances. Therefore,
EPA has taken the very conservative
approach of analzying the non-cancer
risk of thiamethoxam by both (1)
aggregating exposure to thiamethoxam
and its metabolite clothianidin resulting
from use of thiamethoxam and
clothianidin residues resulting from use
of clothianidin as an active ingredient
and comparing this aggregate exposure
to relevant endpoints for thiamethoxam;
and (2) aggregating exposure to
clothianidin resulting from
thiamethoxam use and from use of
clothianidin as an active ingredient and
comparing this aggregate exposure to
relevant endpoints for clothianidin. EPA
has taken the further conservative step
of assuming that, in instances where
both thiamethoxam and clothianidin are
registered for use on a crop, both
pesticides will, in fact, be used on that
crop. Despite this very conservative
approach, thiamethoxam non-cancer
risks (taking into account clothianidin
exposure) are well below the Agency’s
level of concern (LOC).
Pending formal reconsideration of
toxicological equivalency for
thiamethoxam and the clothianidin
metabolite, aggregate risks from both
thiamethoxam and clothianidin are
presented below.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children. The nature of the
toxic effects caused by thiamethoxam as
well as the no observed adverse effect
level (NOAEL) and the lowest observed
adverse effect level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies reviewed are discussed
in the Federal Register of September 17,
2003 (68 FR 54386) (FRL–7327–5). The
nature of the toxic effects caused by the
metabolite clothianidin are discussed in
the Federal Register of May 30, 2003 (68
FR 32390) (FRL–7306–8).
B. Toxicological Endpoints
The dose at which the NOAEL from
the toxicology study identified as
appropriate for use in risk assessment is
used to estimate the toxicological LOC.
However, the LOAEL is sometimes used
for risk assessment if no NOAEL was
achieved in the toxicology study
selected. An uncertainty factor (UF) is
applied to reflect uncertainties inherent
in the extrapolation from laboratory
animal data to humans and in the
variations in sensitivity among members
of the human population as well as
other unknowns. An UF of 100 is
routinely used, 10X to account for
interspecies differences and 10X for
intraspecies differences.
Three other types of safety or
uncertainty factors may be used:
‘‘Traditional uncertainty factors;’’ the
‘‘special FQPA safety factor;’’ and the
‘‘default FQPA safety factor.’’ By the
term ‘‘traditional uncertainty factor,’’
EPA is referring to those additional
uncertainty factors used prior to FQPA
passage to account for database
deficiencies. These traditional
uncertainty factors have been
incorporated by the FQPA into the
additional safety factor for the
protection of infants and children. The
term ‘‘special FQPA safety factor’’ refers
to those safety factors that are deemed
necessary for the protection of infants
and children primarily as a result of the
FQPA. The ‘‘default FQPA safety factor’’
is the additional 10X safety factor that
is mandated by the statute unless it is
decided that there are reliable data to
choose a different additional factor
(potentially a traditional uncertainty
factor or a special FQPA safety factor).
For dietary risk assessment (other
than cancer) the Agency uses the UF to
calculate an acute or chronic reference
dose (acute RfD or chronic RfD) where
the RfD is equal to the NOAEL divided
by an UF of 100 to account for
interspecies and intraspecies differences
and any traditional uncertainty factors
deemed appropriate (RfD = NOAEL/UF).
Where a special FQPA safety factor or
the default FQPA safety factor is used,
this additional factor is applied to the
RfD by dividing the RfD by such
additional factor. The acute or chronic
Population Adjusted Dose (aPAD or
cPAD) is a modification of the RfD to
accommodate this type of safety factor.
For non-dietary risk assessments
(other than cancer) the UF is used to
determine the LOC. For example, when
100 is the appropriate UF (10X to
account for interspecies differences and
10X for intraspecies differences) the
LOC is 100. To estimate risk, a ratio of
the NOAEL to exposures (margin of
exposure (MOE) = NOAEL/exposure) is
calculated and compared to the LOC.
The linear default risk methodology
(Q*) is the primary method currently
used by the Agency to quantify
carcinogenic risk. The Q* approach
assumes that any amount of exposure
will lead to some degree of cancer risk.
A Q* is calculated and used to estimate
risk which represents a probability of
occurrence of additional cancer cases
(e.g., risk). An example of how such a
probability risk is expressed would be to
describe the risk as one in one hundred
thousand (1 × 10-5), one in a million (1
× 10-6), or one in ten million (1 × 10-7).
Under certain specific circumstances,
MOE calculations will be used for the
carcinogenic risk assessment. In this
non-linear approach, a ‘‘point of
departure’’ is identified below which
carcinogenic effects are not expected.
The point of departure is typically a
NOAEL based on an endpoint related to
cancer effects though it may be a
different value derived from the dose
response curve. To estimate risk, a ratio
of the point of departure to exposure
(MOEcancer = point of departure/
exposures) is calculated.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for thiamethoxam used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit:
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSE AND ENDPOINTS FOR THIAMETHOXAM FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK
ASSESSMENT
Exposure Scenario
Acute dietary (general population including infants and
children)
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Dose Used in Risk Assessment, UF
NOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day
UF = 100
Acute RfD = 1 mg/kg/day
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00050
FQPA SF and LOC for
Risk Assessment
Study and Toxicological Effects
FQPA SF = 10
aPAD = acute RfD ÷ FQPA
SF
= 0.1 mg/kg/day
Acute mammalian neurotoxicity study in the rat
LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day based on treatmentrelated neurobehavioral effects observed in
the FOB and LMA testing (drooped palpebral
closure, decreased rectal temperature and
locomotor activity, increased forelimb grip
strength)
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
711
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSE AND ENDPOINTS FOR THIAMETHOXAM FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK
ASSESSMENT—Continued
Dose Used in Risk Assessment, UF
Exposure Scenario
FQPA SF and LOC for
Risk Assessment
Study and Toxicological Effects
Chronic dietary (all populations)
NOAEL = 0.6 mg/kg/day
UF = 100
Chronic RfD = 0.006 mg/
kg/day
FQPA SF = 10
cPAD = chronic RfD ÷
FQPA SF
= 0.0006 mg/kg/day
2–Generation reproduction study
LOAEL = 1.8 mg/kg/day based on increased
incidence and severity of tubular atrophy in
testes of F1 generation males.
Oral nondietary (all durations)
NOAEL = 0.6 mg/kg/day
Residential LOC for MOE =
1,000
2–Generation reproduction study
LOAEL = 1.8 mg/kg/day based on increased
incidence and severity of tubular atrophy in
testes of F1 generation males.
Dermal (all durations)
Oral study
NOAEL = 0.6 mg/kg/day
(dermal absorption rate =
27%)
Resdiential LOC for MOE =
1,000
2-Generation reproduction study
LOAEL = 1.8 mg/kg/day based on increased
incidence and severity of tubular atrophy in
testes of F1 generation males.
Inhalation (all durations)
Oral study NOAEL = 0.6
mg/kg/day(inhalation absorption rate = 100%)
Residential LOC for MOE =
1,000
2–Generation reproduction study
LOAEL = 1.8 mg/kg/day based on increased
incidence and severity of tubular atrophy in
testes of F1 generation males.
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation)
Likely carcinogen for humans based on increased incidence of hepatocellular adenomas and carcinomas in
male and female mice. Quantification of risk based on most potent unit risk: Male mouse liver adenoma and/or carcinoma combined tumor rate. The upper bound estimate of unit risk, Q1* (mg/kg/
day) 2 is 3.77 x 10 2 in human equivalents.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for the metabolite
clothianidin used for human risk
assessment is shown in Table 2 of this
unit:
TABLE 2.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSE AND ENDPOINTS FOR CLOTHIANIDIN FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK
ASSESSMENT
Dose Used in Risk Assessment, Interspecies and
Intraspecies and any Traditional UF
Special FQPA SF and
LOC for Risk Assessment
Study and Toxicological Effects
Acute dietary (Females 13–50
years of age)
Developmental NOAEL = 25
mg/kg/day
UF = 1,000
Acute RfD = 0.025 mg/kg
FQPA SF = 1
aPAD = acute RfD ÷ FQPA
SF
= 0.025 mg/kg
Developmental rabbit study
Developmental LOAEL = 75 mg/kg/day based
on an increased litter incidence of a missing
lobe of the lung.
Acute dietary (General population)
NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day
UF = 1,000
Acute RfD = 0.025 mg/kg
FQPA SF = 1
aPAD = acute RfD ÷ FQPA
SF
= 0.025 mg/kg
Special Neurotoxicity/Pharmacology Study in
Mice and Rats
LOAEL = 50 mg/kg based on transient signs
of decreased spontaneous motor activity,
tremors and deep respirations.
Chronic dietary (All populations)
Offspring NOAEL = 9.8 mg/
kg/day
UF = 1,000
Chronic RfD = 0.0098 mg/kg/
day
FQPA SF = 1
cPAD = chronic RfD ÷
FQPA SF = 0.0098 mg/
kg/day
2–Generation Reproduction Study
Offspring LOAEL = 31.2 mg/kg/day based on
decreased mean body weight gain and delayed sexual maturation, decreased absolute
thymus weights in F1 pups and an increase
in stillbirths in both generations.
Incidental Oral (All durations)
NOAEL = 9.8 mg/kg/day
Residential LOC for MOE
= 1,000
2–Generation reproduction study
Offspring LOAEL = 31.2 mg/kg/day based on
decreased mean body weight gain and delayed sexual maturation, decreased absolute
thymus weights in F1 pups and an increase
in stillbirths in both generations.
Exposure Scenario
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
712
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSE AND ENDPOINTS FOR CLOTHIANIDIN FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK
ASSESSMENT—Continued
Exposure Scenario
Dose Used in Risk Assessment, Interspecies and
Intraspecies and any Traditional UF
Special FQPA SF and
LOC for Risk Assessment
Study and Toxicological Effects
Dermal (All durations)
Oral study
NOAEL = 9.8 mg/kg/day
(dermal absorption rate =
1%)
Residential LOC for MOE
= 1,000
2–Generation reproduction study
Offspring LOAEL = 31.2 mg/kg/day based on
decreased mean body weight gain and delayed sexual maturation, decreased absolute
thymus weights in F1 pups and an increase
in stillbirths in both generations.
Inhalation (All durations)
Oral study
NOAEL = 9.8 mg/kg/day (inhalation absorption rate =
100%)
Residential LOC for MOE
= 1,000
2–Generation reproduction study
Offspring LOAEL = 31.2 mg/kg/day based on
decreased mean body weight gain and delayed sexual maturation, decreased absolute
thymus weights in F1 pups and an increase
in stillbirths in both generations.
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation)
Classification: Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. Tolerances have been
established (40 CFR 180.565) for the
combined residues of thiamethoxam
and its metabolite clothianidin in or on
a variety of raw agricultural
commodities. Tolerances for
thiamethoxam are established on barley,
canola, cotton, sorghum, wheat,
imported coffee, pecan, stone fruit,
succulent bean, sunflower, tuberous and
corm vegetables crop subgroup, fruiting
vegetables, crop group, tomato paste,
cucurbit vegetables crop group, pome
fruits crop group, field corn forage, field
corn stover, sweet corn stover, field corn
grain, popcorn grain, sweet corn (kernal
and cob with husk removed), milk, and
the meat and meat by products of cattle,
goats, horses, and sheep. Since
clothianidin is a major metabolite of
thiamethoxam, residues of clothianidin
that would theoretically result from
registered and pending uses of
clothianidin and residues that would
theoretically result from the metabolism
of thiamethoxam are included in the
analysis. Risk assessments were
conducted by EPA to assess dietary
exposures from thiamethoxam in food
as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Acute dietary risk
assessments are performed for a fooduse pesticide, if a toxicological study
has indicated the possibility of an effect
of concern occurring as a result of a 1day or single exposure. In conducting
the acute dietary risk assessment EPA
used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation
Model software with the Food
Commodity Intake Database (DEEMFCIDTM), which incorporates food
consumption data as reported by
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
respondents in the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1994–1996 and 1998 Nationwide
Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII), and accumulated
exposure to the chemical for each
commodity. The following assumptions
were made for the acute exposure
assessments: EPA conducted the acute
dietary exposure analysis based on
highly conservative assumptions. The
residues of concern for the acute
analysis are thiamethoxam and its
metabolite clothianidin. The assessment
for thiamethoxam assumed that 100% of
the registered and proposed crops were
treated and that all treated crops and
livestock had residues of concern at the
tolerance level. The general U.S.
population and all population
subgroups have exposure and risk
estimates which are below EPA’s LOC
(i.e., the aPADs are all below 100%).
The most highly exposed subgroup is
children 1 to 2 years of age. The
exposure estimate for children 1 to 2
years of age is 0.01099 mg/kg/day,
which is equivalent to 11% of the aPAD.
For the metabolite clothianidin, the
acute analysis is a conservative
assessment that was based on tolerance
level residues and the assumption of
100 percent crop treated (PCT) for
established and proposed clothianidin
uses. For the commodities that have
both thiamethoxam tolerances and
established or proposed clothianidin
tolerances (i.e., sweet corn, field corn,
pop corn, canola, milk, and pome fruit),
the proposed clothianidin tolerances are
added to the residues that could result
from use of thiamethoxam. The general
U.S. population and all population
subgroups have exposure and risk
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
estimates which are below EPA’s LOC
(i.e., the aPADs are all below 100%).
The most highly exposed population
subgroup is infants less than 1 year old,
which utilizes 80% of the aPAD.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary risk assessment EPA
used the DEEM-FCIDTM, which
incorporates food consumption data as
reported by respondents in the USDA
1994–1996 and 1998 Nationwide CSFII,
and accumulated exposure to the
chemical for each commodity. The
following assumptions were made for
the chronic exposure assessments: The
residues of concern for the chronic
analysis are thiamethoxam and its
metabolite clothianidin. The chronic
analysis for thiamethoxam was based on
anticipated residues in the form of
average field trial residue values, and
the analysis included percent crop
estimates. The general U.S. population
and all population subgroups have
exposure and risk estimates which are
below EPA’s LOC (i.e., the cPADs are all
below 100%). The most highly exposed
subgroup is children 1 to 2 years of age.
The exposure estimate for children 1 to
2 years of age is 0.000103 mg/kg/day,
which is equivalent to 17% of the cPAD.
For clothianidin, the chronic analysis
is a relatively conservative assessment
that was based on tolerance level
residues and the assumption of 100%
crop treated for established and
proposed clothianidin uses, with the
exception of anticipated residues (AR)
for apples and pears. For the
commodities that have both
thiamethoxam tolerances and
established or proposed clothianidin
tolerances (i.e., sweet corn, field corn,
pop corn, canola, and milk), the
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
713
does not understate exposure for the
population in such area. In addition, the
Agency must provide for periodic
evaluation of any estimates used. To
provide for the periodic evaluation of
the estimate of PCT as required by
section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA, EPA may
require registrants to submit data on
PCT.
The Agency used PCT information as
follows:For existing uses, the Agency
used estimates of PCT for the chronic
exposure assessment which was
determined using USDA’s National
Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS)
Usage Data (1999–2003) and EPA
Proprietary Usage Data (2001–2003).
The chronic PCT estimates that were
used for existing uses are shown in
Table 3:
Tuberous and Corm
Vegetables - Crop
subgroup 1C (except
potatoes) .................
33
Watermelons ...............
13
Wheat .........................
2
proposed clothianidin tolerances are
added to the residues that could result
from use of thiamethoxam. For apples
and pears, the highest average field trial
(HAFT) levels from the residue field
trials were added to the residues that
could result from use of thiamethoxam.
The general U.S. population and all
population subgroups have exposure
and risk estimates which are below
EPA’s LOC (i.e., the cPADs are all below
100%). The most highly exposed
population subgroup is children 1 to 2
years of age, which utilizes 15% of the
cPAD.
iii. Cancer. The residue of concern for
the cancer analysis is thiamethoxam,
per se. The residues of its metabolite
clothianidin were removed from the
cancer analysis because the metabolite
was found to be ‘‘not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans’’ when it was
evaluated as an active ingredient. The
cancer analysis was based on average
field trial residue values as well as PCT
estimates. The estimated dietary
exposure to the U.S. population is
0.000263 mg/kg/day.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. Section 408(b)(2)(E) of the
FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available
data and information on the anticipated
residue levels of pesticide residues in
food and the actual levels of pesticide
chemicals that have been measured in
food. If EPA relies on such information,
EPA must pursuant to section 408(f)(1)
require that data be provided 5 years
after the tolerance is established,
modified, or left in effect, demonstrating
that the levels in food are not above the
levels anticipated. Following the initial
data submission, EPA is authorized to
require similar data on a time frame it
deems appropriate. For the present
action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
for information relating to anticipated
residues as are required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized
under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Such
data call-ins will be required to be
submitted no later than 5 years from the
date of issuance of this tolerance.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states
that the Agency may use data on the
actual percent of food treated for
assessing chronic dietary risk only if the
Agency can make the following
findings: Condition 1, that the data used
are reliable and provide a valid basis to
show what percentage of the food
derived from such crop is likely to
contain such pesticide residue;
Condition 2, that the exposure estimate
does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group; and
Condition 3, if data are available on
pesticide use and food consumption in
a particular area, the exposure estimate
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
TABLE 3.—THIAMETHOXAM ESTIMATES
OF CROP TREATED FOR EXISTING
USES
PO 00000
Percent Crop
Treated
Commodity
Apples .........................
5
Barley ..........................
1
Canola ........................
55
Cantaloupes ................
13
Casabas ......................
44
Cottonseed .................
20
Crabapples .................
20
Cucumbers .................
5
Field corn, grain ..........
6
Fruiting vegetables
(except cucurbits Crop group 8) ..........
15
Honeydew melons ......
13
Loquats .......................
53
Pears ..........................
9
Popcorn ......................
6
Potatoes ......................
41
Pumpkins ....................
44
Quinces .......................
53
Sorghum (including
milo) ........................
9
Squash ........................
44
Sunflowers ..................
25
Sweet corn ..................
6
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
TABLE 3.—THIAMETHOXAM ESTIMATES
OF CROP TREATED FOR EXISTING
USES—Continued
Commodity
Percent Crop
Treated
For the new uses, the Agency used
PCT estimates for the chronic exposure
assessment based on usage data and
market share projections as follows.
Market share projections for the new
uses for thiamethoxam were obtained
from the registrant and compared to
1999–2003 USDA NASS Usage Data and
EPA 2001–2003 Proprietary Usage Data
for the historically, most widely used
insecticide for control of insect pests for
each crop. As a result of this
comparison, the highest, most
conservative PCT estimate for each crop
was used for the chronic exposure
assessment. These highly conservative
estimates should not underestimate
actual usage of thiamethoxam on the
new crops/sites. To further support the
reliability of these PCT estimates, as a
condition of registration, the registrant
will be required to agree to report
annually on the market share attained
for the new uses for which
thiamethoxam is registered. As a
condition of registration, they will also
be required to agree to mitigate dietary
risk as deemed appropriate by the
Agency should the market share data
raise a concern for increased dietary
risk. The Agency will then compare that
market share information with the PCT
estimates used to evaluate potential
dietary risk. In those instances where
percent market share is approaching or
exceeding the predicted PCT estimate
used in the Agency’s risk assessment,
EPA will conduct a new dietary risk
assessment to evaluate the new dietary
risk. If the market share data raise a
concern for increased pesticide risk, the
Agency will act to mitigate that dietary
risk and could employ several
approaches, including but not limited to
production caps, geographical
limitations, removal of uses, or other
means deemed appropriate by the
Agency. The chronic PCT estimates that
were used for existing uses are shown
in Table 4:
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
714
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 4.—THIAMETHOXAM ESTIMATES
OF CROP TREATED FOR NEW USES
Commodity
Percent Crop
Treated
Beans, lima .................
38
Beans, snap ................
37
Bushberries .................
55
Carrots ........................
20
Cranberries .................
29
Mint .............................
9
Peas, green processed
36
Peas (including dried
peas) .......................
44
Soybeans ....................
11
Strawberries ................
46
The Agency believes that the three
conditions listed in this Unit III. have
been met. With respect to Condition 1,
PCT estimates are derived from Federal
and private market survey data, which
are reliable and have a valid basis. EPA
uses a weighted average PCT for chronic
dietary exposure estimates. This
weighted average PCT figure is derived
by averaging State-level data for a
period of up to 10 years, and weighting
for the more robust and recent data. A
weighted average of the PCT reasonably
represents a person’s dietary exposure
over a lifetime, and is unlikely to
underestimate exposure to an individual
because of the fact that pesticide use
patterns (both regionally and nationally)
tend to change continuously over time,
such that an individual is unlikely to be
exposed to more than the average PCT
over a lifetime. As to Conditions 2 and
3, regional consumption information
and consumption information for
significant subpopulations is taken into
account through EPA’s computer-based
model for evaluating the exposure of
significant subpopulations including
several regional groups. Use of this
consumption information in EPA’s risk
assessment process ensures that EPA’s
exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant
subpopulation group and allows the
Agency to be reasonably certain that no
regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those
estimated by the Agency. Other than the
data available through national food
consumption surveys, EPA does not
have available information on the
regional consumption of food to which
thiamethoxam may be applied in a
particular area.
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency lacks sufficient
monitoring exposure data to complete a
comprehensive dietary exposure
analysis and risk assessment for
thiamethoxam in drinking water.
Because the Agency does not have
comprehensive monitoring data,
drinking water concentration estimates
are made by reliance on simulation or
modeling taking into account data on
the physical characteristics of
thiamethoxam.
The Agency uses the FQPA Index
Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) or the
Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure
Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/
EXAMS), to produce estimates of
pesticide concentrations in an index
reservoir. The screening concentration
in ground water (SCIGROW) model is
used to predict pesticide concentrations
in shallow ground water. For a
screening-level assessment for surface
water EPA will use FIRST (a Tier 1
model) before using PRZM/EXAMS (a
Tier 2 model). The FIRST model is a
subset of the PRZM/EXAMS model that
uses a specific high-end runoff scenario
for pesticides. Both FIRST and PRZM/
EXAMS incorporate an index reservoir
environment, and both models include
a percent crop area factor as an
adjustment to account for the maximum
percent crop coverage within a
watershed or drainage basin.
None of these models include
consideration of the impact processing
(mixing, dilution, or treatment) of raw
water for distribution as drinking water
would likely have on the removal of
pesticides from the source water. The
primary use of these models by the
Agency at this stage is to provide a
screen for sorting out pesticides for
which it is unlikely that drinking water
concentrations would exceed human
health LOC.
Since the models used are considered
to be screening tools in the risk
assessment process, the Agency does
not use estimated environmental
concentrations (EECs), which are the
model estimates of a pesticide’s
concentration in water. EECs derived
from these models are used to quantify
drinking water exposure and risk as a
%RfD or %PAD. Instead drinking water
levels of comparison (DWLOCs) are
calculated and used as a point of
comparison against the model estimates
of a pesticide’s concentration in water.
DWLOCs are theoretical upper limits on
a pesticide’s concentration in drinking
water in light of total aggregate exposure
to a pesticide in food, and from
residential uses. Since DWLOCs address
total aggregate exposure to
thiamethoxam they are further
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
discussed in the aggregate risk sections
in Unit E.
Based on the PRZM/EXAMS and
SCIGROW models, the EECs of
thiamethoxam for acute exposures are
estimated to be 11.4 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 5 ppb for
ground water. The EECs for chronic
non-cancer exposures are estimated to
be 0.77 ppb for surface water and 1.94
ppb for ground water. The EECs for
cancer exposures are estimated to be
0.31 ppb for surface water and 1.94 ppb
for ground water.
Clothianidin is not a significant
degradate of thiamethoxam in water.
Therefore, residues of clothianidin in
water were estimated based on
applications of clothianidin as an active
ingredient. Based on the FIRST and
SCIGROW models, the EECs of
clothianidin for acute exposures are
estimated to be 7.29 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 5.84 ppb for
ground water. The EECs for chronic
exposures are estimated to be 1.35 ppb
for surface water and 5.84 ppb for
ground water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
Thiamethoxam is not registered for use
on any sites that would result in
residential exposure.
Clothianidin is currently registered
for use on turfgrasses. Exposures and
risk resulting from clothianidin residues
on turfgrasses are included in the
aggregate risk assessment for
clothianidin.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
Unlike other pesticides for which EPA
has followed a cumulative risk approach
based on a common mechanism of
toxicity, EPA has not made a common
mechanism of toxicity finding as to
thiamethoxam and any other substances
and thiamethoxam does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
not assumed that thiamethoxam has a
common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see the policy statements
released by EPA’s OPP concerning
common mechanism determinations
and procedures for cumulating effects
from substances found to have a
common mechanism on EPA’s Web site
at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative/.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA
provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold margin of safety for
infants and children in the case of
threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the data base on
toxicity and exposure unless EPA
determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for
infants and children. Margins of safety
are incorporated into EPA risk
assessments either directly through use
of a MOE analysis or through using
uncertainty (safety) factors in
calculating a dose level that poses no
appreciable risk to humans. In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X when reliable data
do not support the choice of a different
factor, or, if reliable data are available,
EPA uses a different additional safety
factor value based on the use of
traditional uncertainty factors and/or
special FQPA safety factors, as
appropriate.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
The developmental toxicity studies
indicated no quantitative or qualitative
evidence of increased susceptibility of
rat or rabbit fetus to in utero exposure
based on the fact that the developmental
NOAELs are either higher than or equal
to the maternal NOAELs. However, the
reproductive studies indicate effects in
males rats in the form of increased
incidence and severity of testicular
tubular atrophy. These data are
715
body weights and consumption values
as used by the EPA’s Office of Water are
used to calculate DWLOCs: 2 liter (L)/
70 kg (adult male), 2L/60 kg (adult
female), and 1L/10 kg (child). Default
body weights and drinking water
consumption values vary on an
individual basis. This variation will be
taken into account in more refined
screening-level and quantitative
drinking water exposure assessments.
Different populations will have different
DWLOCs. Generally, a DWLOC is
calculated for each type of risk
assessment used: Acute, short-term,
intermediate-term, chronic, and cancer.
When EECs for surface water and
ground water are less than the
calculated DWLOCs, EPA concludes
with reasonable certainty that exposures
to the pesticide in drinking water (when
considered along with other sources of
exposure for which EPA has reliable
data) would not result in unacceptable
levels of aggregate human health risk at
this time. Because EPA considers the
aggregate risk resulting from multiple
exposure pathways associated with a
pesticide’s uses, levels of comparison in
drinking water may vary as those uses
change. If new uses are added in the
future, EPA will reassess the potential
impacts of residues of the pesticide in
drinking water as a part of the aggregate
risk assessment process.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food to thiamethoxam
will occupy 4% of the aPAD for the U.S.
population, 2% of the aPAD for females
13 years and older, 10% of the aPAD for
infants less than one year old, and 11%
of the aPAD for children 1 to 2 years
old. In addition, there is potential for
acute dietary exposure to thiamethoxam
in drinking water. After calculating
DWLOCs and comparing them to the
EECs for surface and ground water, EPA
does not expect the aggregate exposure
to exceed 100% of the aPAD, as shown
in Table 5 of this unit:
considered to be evidence of increased
quantitative susceptibility for male pups
when compared to the parents.
3. Conclusion. There is a complete
toxicity data base for thiamethoxam and
exposure data are complete or are
estimated based on data that reasonably
accounts for potential exposures. EPA
determined that the 10X special safety
factor to protect infants and children
should be retained, based on the
following factors: Effects on endocrine
organs observed across species; the
significant decrease in alanine amino
transferase levels in the companion
animal studies and in the dog studies;
the mode of action of this chemical in
insects (interferes with the nicotinic
acetyl choline receptors of the insect’s
nervous system); the transient clinical
signs of neurotoxicity in several studies
across species; and the suggestive
evidence of increased quantitative
susceptibility in the rat reproduction
study.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
To estimate total aggregate exposure
to a pesticide from food, drinking water,
and residential uses, the Agency
calculates DWLOCs which are used as a
point of comparison against EECs.
DWLOC values are not regulatory
standards for drinking water. DWLOCs
are theoretical upper limits on a
pesticide’s concentration in drinking
water in light of total aggregate exposure
to a pesticide in food and residential
uses. In calculating a DWLOC, the
Agency determines how much of the
acceptable exposure (i.e., the PAD) is
available for exposure through drinking
water (e.g., allowable chronic water
exposure (mg/kg/day) = cPAD ¥
(average food + residential exposure)).
This allowable exposure through
drinking water is used to calculate a
DWLOC.
A DWLOC will vary depending on the
toxic endpoint, drinking water
consumption, and body weights. Default
TABLE 5.—AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR ACUTE EXPOSURE TO THIAMETHOXAM
aPAD (mg/
kg)
Population Subgroup
Surface
Water EEC
(ppb)
% aPAD
(Food)
Ground
Water EEC
(ppb)
Acute
DWLOC
(ppb)
General U.S. Population ......................................................................
0.1
4
11.4
5
3,400
All infants (less than one year old) ......................................................
0.1
10
11.4
5
900
Children 1–2 years old .........................................................................
0.1
11
11.4
5
890
Females 13–49 years old ....................................................................
0.1
2
11.4
5
2,900
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
716
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
Sources of clothianidin residues in
food include uses of both thiamethoxam
and clothianidin. Toxicological doses
and endpoints for clothianidin were
used to calculate risk. The acute dietary
exposure from food to the metabolite
clothianidin will occupy 18% of the
aPAD for the U.S. population, 12% of
the aPAD for females 13 years and older,
80% of the aPAD for infants less than
one year old, and 60% of the aPAD for
children 1 to 2 years old. In addition,
there is potential for acute dietary
exposure to clothianidin in drinking
water. After calculating DWLOCs and
comparing them to the EECs for surface
water and ground water, EPA does not
expect the aggregate exposure to exceed
100% of the aPAD, as shown in Table
6 of this unit:
TABLE 6.—AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR ACUTE EXPOSURE TO CLOTHIANIDIN
aPAD (mg/
kg)
Population Subgroup
Surface
Water EEC
(ppb)
% aPAD
(Food)
Ground
Water EEC
(ppb)
Acute
DWLOC
(ppb)
General U.S. Population ......................................................................
0.025
18
7.29
5.84
710
All infants (less than one year old) ......................................................
0.025
80
7.29
5.84
48
Children 1–2 years old .........................................................................
0.025
60
7.29
5.84
92
Females 13–49 years old ....................................................................
0.025
12
7.29
5.84
640
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that exposure to thiamethoxam from
food will utilize 6% of the cPAD for the
U.S. population, 11% of the cPAD for
infants less than one year old, and 17%
calculating DWLOCs and comparing
them to the EECs for surface and ground
water, EPA does not expect the
aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of
the cPAD, as shown in Table 7 of this
unit:
of the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years
old. There are no residential uses for
thiamethoxam that result in chronic
residential exposure to thiamethoxam.
In addition, there is potential for
chronic dietary exposure to
thiamethoxam in drinking water. After
TABLE 7.—AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CHRONIC (NON-CANCER) EXPOSURE TO THIAMETHOXAM
cPAD (mg/
kg)
Population Subgroup
Surface
Water EEC
(ppb)
% cPAD
(Food)
Ground
Water EEC
(ppb)
Chronic
DWLOC
(ppb)
U.S. population ....................................................................................
0.0006
6
0.77
1.94
20
All infants (less than one year old) ......................................................
0.0006
11
0.77
1.94
5.4
Children 1–2 years old .........................................................................
0.0006
17
0.77
1.94
5
Females 13–49 years old ....................................................................
0.0006
5
0.77
1.94
17
Sources of clothianidin residues in
food include uses of both thiamethoxam
and clothianidin. Toxicological doses
and endpoints for clothianidin were
used to calculate risk. Exposure to the
metabolite clothianidin from food will
utilize 6% of the cPAD for the U.S.
population, 13% of the cPAD for infants
less than one year old, and 15% of the
metabolite clothianidin in drinking
water. After calculating DWLOCs and
comparing them to the EECs for surface
and ground water, EPA does not expect
the aggregate exposure to exceed 100%
of the cPAD, as shown in Table 8 of this
unit:
cPAD for children 1 - 2 years old.
Combined residential exposure
estimates range from an MOE of 1,300
for combined oral and dermal exposure
to toddlers (treated turf + treated soil +
dermal) to 8,900 for dermal exposure to
adults (application + post-application)
adults. In addition, there is potential for
chronic dietary exposure to the
TABLE 8.—AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CHRONIC (NON-CANCER) EXPOSURE TO CLOTHIANIDIN
cPAD (mg/
kg)
Population Subgroup
Surface
Water EEC
(ppb)
% cPAD
(Food)
Ground
Water EEC
(ppb)
Chronic
DWLOC
(ppb)
U.S. population ....................................................................................
0.0098
6
1.35
5.84
320
All infants (less than one year old) ......................................................
0.0098
13
1.35
5.84
85
Children 1–2 years old .........................................................................
0.0098
15
1.35
5.84
83
Females 13–49 years old ....................................................................
0.0098
5
1.35
5.84
280
Adults 50+ years old ............................................................................
0.0098
5
1.35
5.84
330
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Thiamethoxam is not registered for use
on any sites that would result in
residential exposure. Therefore, the
aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from
food and water, which do not exceed
the Agency’s LOC.
Short-term aggregate exposures from
the metabolite clothianidin result in
aggregate MOEs of 5,900 for the general
U.S. population, 1,100 for children 1 to
2 years old, and 6,200 for females 13 to
49 years old. These aggregate MOEs do
not exceed the Agency’s LOC for
aggregate exposure to food and
717
residential uses. In addition, short-term
DWLOCs were calculated and compared
to the EECs for chronic exposure of
clothianidin in ground and surface
water. After calculating DWLOCs and
comparing them to the EECs for surface
water and ground water, EPA does not
expect short-term aggregate exposure to
exceed the Agency’s LOC, as shown in
Table 9 of this unit:
TABLE 9.—AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR SHORT-TERM EXPOSURE TO CLOTHIANIDIN
Aggregate
MOE (Food
+ Residential)
Population Subgroup
Surface
Water EEC
(ppb)
Aggregate
LOC
Ground
Water EEC
(ppb)
Short-Term
DWLOC
(ppb)
General U.S. population ......................................................................
5,900
1,000
1.35
5.84
280
Children 1–2 years old .........................................................................
1,100
1,000
1.35
5.84
8.7
Females 13–49 years old ....................................................................
6,200
1,000
1.35
5.84
250
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account residential exposure
plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Thiamethoxam is not
registered for use on any sites that
would result in residential exposure.
Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum
of the risk from food and water, which
do not exceed the Agency’s LOC.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposures
from the metabolite clothianidin result
in aggregate MOEs of 5,900 for the
general U.S. population, 1,100 for
children 1 to 2 years old, and 6,200 for
females 13 to 49 years old. These
aggregate MOEs do not exceed the
Agency’s LOC for aggregate exposure to
food and residential uses. In addition,
intermediate-term DWLOCs were
calculated and compared to the EECs for
chronic exposure of clothianidin in
ground water and surface water. After
calculating DWLOCs and comparing
them to the EECs for surface water and
ground water, EPA does not expect
intermediate-term aggregate exposure to
exceed the Agency’s LOC, as shown in
Table 10 of this unit:
TABLE 10.—AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR INTERMEDIATE-TERM EXPOSURE TO CLOTHIANIDIN
Aggregate
MOE (Food
+ Residential)
Population Subgroup
Surface
Water EEC
(ppb)
Aggregate
LOC
Ground
Water EEC
(ppb)
IntermediateTerm
DWLOC
(ppb)
General U.S. population ......................................................................
5,900
1,000
1.35
5.84
280
Children 1–2 years old .........................................................................
1,100
1,000
1.35
5.84
8.7
Females 13–49 years old ....................................................................
6,200
1,000
1.35
5.84
250
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. In conducting the aggregate
cancer risk assessment, only dietary and
drinking water pathways of exposure
were considered. At this time, there are
no uses for thiamethoxam that would
result in any non-occupational, nondietary exposure (i.e., there are no
dermal or inhalation routes of exposure
that should be included in an aggregate
assessment). A DWLOC was derived for
the general U.S. population based on
EPA’s LOC for cancer or a risk in the
range of 1 in 1 million. The DWLOC is
compared to the estimated
environmental concentrations of
thiamethoxam in surface and ground
water and is used to determine whether
or not aggregate cancer exposures are
likely to result in risk estimates that
exceed EPA’s LOC. Table 11 of this unit
summarizes the drinking water
estimated concentrations of
thiamethoxam in surface water and
ground water and the associated
DWLOC for cancer:
TABLE 11.—AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CANCER EXPOSURE TO THIAMETHOXAM
Maximum
Exposure
mg/kg/day
Population Subgroup
General U.S. population ..............................................
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00057
7.96 x
10 5
Fmt 4700
Food Exposure mg/kg/
day
Maximum
Water Exposure mg/kg/
day
7.96 x
10 5
7.96 x
10 5
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
Cancer
DWLOC
ppb
1.87
05JAR1
Ground
Water EEC
ppb
Surface
Water EEC
ppb
1.94
0.31
718
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
For cancer, the DWLOC is slightly less
than the ground water EEC. However,
the cancer DWLOC is based on a
conservative estimate of dietary
exposure. Available information from
actual prospective ground water
monitoring data demonstrates that
actual thiamethoxam residues in
groundwater occur at or below 0.05 ppb.
This interim analysis suggests that
actual long-term residues of
thiamethoxam in ground water will be
significantly less than the levels
predicted by the SCIGROW model. A
significant decrease in the level of
thiamethoxam in drinking water results
in an aggregate risk estimate that is
unlikely to exceed EPA’s LOC for
cancer. Further, the DWLOC numerical
computation was done using a cancer
risk figure of 1 in 1 million although
EPA has repeatedly found that risk
figures marginally higher than 1 in 1
million fall within the range of a 1 in
1 million risk.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, and to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to
thiamethoxam residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(aqueous acetonitrile solvent extraction,
liquid-liquid partitioning and solidphase extraction cleanup, and high
pressure liquid chromatography/
ultraviolet (HPLC/UV) analysis) is
available to enforce the tolerance
expression. The method may be
requested from: Chief, Analytical
Chemistry Branch, Environmental
Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft.
Meade, MD 20755–5350; telephone
number: (410) 305–2905; e-mail address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
There are no international residue
limits for thiamethoxam.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, the tolerance is established
for combined residues of thiamethoxam,
3-[(2-chloro-5thiazolyl)methyl]tetrahydro-5-methyl-Nnitro-4H-1,3,5-oxadiazin-4-imine and its
metabolite (N-(2-chloro-thiazol-5ylmethyl)-N‘-methyl-N’‘-nitroguanidine), in or on legume vegetables
group 6 at 0.02 ppm, peppermint and
spearmint at 1.5 ppm; root vegetables
(except sugar beet) crop subgroup 1B at
0.02 ppm and for radish tops at 0.80
ppm; strawberry at 0.30 ppm; cranberry
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
at 0.02 ppm; bushberry crop subgroup
13B and juneberry, lingonberry and
salal at 0.20 ppm; rapeseed seed,
mustard seed, flax seed, safflower seed,
crambe seed, and borage seed at 0.02
ppm; and potato at 0.25 ppm. In
addition, the tolerance expression for
tuberous and corm crop subgroup 1C is
revised to a tolerance expression for
tuberous and corm (except potato) crop
subgroup 1D.
VI. Objections and Hearing Requests
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, as
amended by FQPA, any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this
regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. The EPA
procedural regulations which govern the
submission of objections and requests
for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178.
Although the procedures in those
regulations require some modification to
reflect the amendments made to FFDCA
by FQPA, EPA will continue to use
those procedures, with appropriate
adjustments, until the necessary
modifications can be made. The new
section 408(g) of FFDCA provides
essentially the same process for persons
to ‘‘object’’ to a regulation for an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance issued by EPA under new
section 408(d) of FFDCA, as was
provided in the old sections 408 and
409 of FFDCA. However, the period for
filing objections is now 60 days, rather
than 30 days.
A. What Do I Need To Do To File an
Objection or Request a Hearing?
You must file your objection or
request a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions
provided in this unit and in 40 CFR part
178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,
you must identify docket ID number
OPP–2004–0394 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
requests must be in writing, and must be
mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk
on or before March 7, 2005.
1. Filing the request. Your objection
must specify the specific provisions in
the regulation that you object to, and the
grounds for the objections (40 CFR
178.25). If a hearing is requested, the
objections must include a statement of
the factual issues(s) on which a hearing
is requested, the requestor’s contentions
on such issues, and a summary of any
evidence relied upon by the objector (40
CFR 178.27). Information submitted in
connection with an objection or hearing
request may be claimed confidential by
marking any part or all of that
information as CBI. Information so
marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40 CFR part 2. A copy of the
information that does not contain CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public record. Information not marked
confidential may be disclosed publicly
by EPA without prior notice.
Mail your written request to: Office of
the Hearing Clerk (1900L),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001. You may also deliver
your request to the Office of the Hearing
Clerk in Suite 350, 1099 14th St., NW.,
Washington, DC 20005. The Office of
the Hearing Clerk is open from 8 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Office of the Hearing
Clerk is (202) 564–6255.
2. Copies for the Docket. In addition
to filing an objection or hearing request
with the Hearing Clerk as described in
Unit VI.A., you should also send a copy
of your request to the PIRIB for its
inclusion in the official record that is
described in ADDRESSES. Mail your
copies, identified by docket ID number
OPP–2004–0394, to: Public Information
and Records Integrity Branch,
Information Resources and Services
Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001. In person
or by courier, bring a copy to the
location of the PIRIB described in
ADDRESSES. You may also send an
electronic copy of your request via email to: opp-docket@epa.gov. Please use
an ASCII file format and avoid the use
of special characters and any form of
encryption. Copies of electronic
objections and hearing requests will also
be accepted on disks in WordPerfect
6.1/8.0 or ASCII file format. Do not
include any CBI in your electronic copy.
You may also submit an electronic copy
of your request at many Federal
Depository Libraries.
B. When Will the Agency Grant a
Request for a Hearing?
A request for a hearing will be granted
if the Administrator determines that the
material submitted shows the following:
There is a genuine and substantial issue
of fact; there is a reasonable possibility
that available evidence identified by the
requestor would, if established resolve
one or more of such issues in favor of
the requestor, taking into account
uncontested claims or facts to the
contrary; and resolution of the factual
issues(s) in the manner sought by the
requestor would be adequate to justify
the action requested (40 CFR 178.32).
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
719
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes a tolerance
under section 408(d) of FFDCA in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory
Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this rule has
been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of
significance, this rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This final rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any
enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public
Law 104–4). Nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive
Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994); or OMB review or any Agency
action under Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since
tolerances and exemptions that are
established on the basis of a petition
under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply. In addition, the
Agency has determined that this action
will not have a substantial direct effect
on States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Executive Order 13132 requires
EPA to develop an accountable process
to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies
that have federalism implications’’ is
defined in the Executive Order to
include regulations that have
‘‘substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’ This final rule
directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers and food
retailers, not States. This action does not
alter the relationships or distribution of
power and responsibilities established
by Congress in the preemption
provisions of section 408(n)(4) of
FFDCA. For these same reasons, the
Agency has determined that this rule
does not have any ‘‘tribal implications’’
as described in Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 6, 2000). Executive
Order 13175, requires EPA to develop
an accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal
officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal
implications’’ is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and the Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.’’ This
rule will not have substantial direct
effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
VIII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of this final
rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: December 22, 2004.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.565 is amended by
alphabetically adding commodities to
the table in paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
I
§ 180.565 Thiamethoxam; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
Commodity
*
*
Parts per million
*
*
*
Borage, seed ..................
*
*
*
*
0.02
*
Bushberry, subgroup 13B
*
*
*
*
0.20
*
*
0.02
0.02
0.02
*
*
0.20
0.20
*
*
0.02
1.5
0.25
0.80
0.02
0.02
0.20
*
*
1.5
0.3
*
Crambe, seed .................
Cranberry ........................
Flax, seed .......................
*
*
*
Juneberry ........................
Lingonberry .....................
*
*
*
Mustard, seed .................
Peppermint .....................
Potato .............................
Radish, tops ....................
Rapeseed, seed .............
Safflower, seed ...............
Salal ................................
*
*
*
Spearmint .......................
Strawberry ......................
*
*
*
Vegetable, legume,
group 6 ........................
Vegetable, root, except
sugar beet, subgroup
1B ................................
*
0.02
0.02
*
*
*
*
3. Section 180.565 is amended by
revising the tolerance expression for
Tuberous and Corm Vegetables Crop
Subgroup in the table in paragraph (a) to
I
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
720
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
read Vegetable, tuberous and corm,
except potato, subgroup 1D.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–89 Filed 1–4–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CC Docket No. 96–128; FCC 04–251]
The Pay Telephone Reclassification
and Compensation Provisions of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule; petitions for
reconsideration.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: By this document, we
consider four petitions for
reconsideration of our Report and Order
which established detailed rules (the
‘‘rules’’ or ‘‘Payphone Compensation
Rules’’) ensuring that payphone service
providers (PSPs) are ‘‘fairly
compensated’’ for each and every
completed payphone-originated call.
This Order on Reconsideration does not
change the compensation framework
adopted last year, but rather refines and
builds upon its approach. The
Commission provides guidance on the
types of contracts that it would deem to
be reasonable methods of compensating
PSPs, extends the time period that
carriers must retain certain payphone
records, and clarifies the rules’
reporting, certification, and audit
requirements.
Effective January 5, 2005, except
for § 64.1310(g) which contains
information collection requirements that
are not effective until approved by the
Office of Management and Budget. The
Commission will publish a document in
the Federal Register announcing the
effective date of that section.
ADDRESSES: A copy of any comments on
the Paperwork Reduction Act
information collection requirements
contained herein should be submitted to
Judith B. Herman, Federal
Communications Commission, Room 1–
C804, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20554, or via the Internet to JudithB.Herman@fcc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Darryl Cooper Attorney-Advisor,
Competition Policy Division, Wireline
Competition Bureau, at (202) 418–7131,
or via the Internet at
darryl.cooper@fcc.gov or Denise A.
Coca, Attorney-Advisor, Competition
DATES:
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:19 Jan 04, 2005
Jkt 205001
Policy Division, Wireline Competition
Bureau, at (202) 418–0574, or via the
Internet at denise.coca@fcc.gov. For
additional information concerning the
Paperwork Reduction Act information
collection requirements contained in
this document, contact Judith B.
Herman at 202–418–0214, or via the
Internet to Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Order on
Reconsideration, CC Docket No. 96–128,
FCC 04–251, adopted October 20, 2004,
and released October 22, 2004. Filings
and comments are also available for
public inspection and copying during
regular business hours at the FCC
Reference Information Center, Portals II,
445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–A257,
Washington, DC, 20554. They may also
be purchased from the Commission’s
copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing,
Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–
B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone
1 (800) 378–3160 or (202) 4880–5300,
facsimile (202) 488–5563, or via e-mail
at https://www.bcpiweb.com.
Synopsis of the Order on
Reconsideration and the Report and
Order
I. Introduction
1. In this Order on Reconsideration,
we consider four petitions for
reconsideration of our Report and Order
adopted on September 30, 2003, which
established detailed rules ensuring that
PSPs are ‘‘fairly compensated’’ for each
and every completed payphoneoriginated call (Implementation of the
Pay Telephone Reclassification and
Compensation Provisions of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996, CC
Docket No. 96–128, Report and Order,
68 FR 62751–01, (November 6, 2003)).
This Order on Reconsideration, released
on October 22, 2004, does not change
this compensation framework, but
rather refines and builds upon its
approach. In the Order on
Reconsideration, the Commission
provides guidance on the types of
contracts that it would deem to be
reasonable methods of compensating
PSPs, extends the time period that
carriers must retain certain payphone
records, and clarifies the rules’
reporting, certification, and audit
requirements.
II. Background
2. The Report and Order held that the
last facilities-based long distance carrier
in a call path—either an interexchange
carrier (IXC) or a switched-based
reseller (SBR)—is responsible for
compensating PSPs. For local calls,
where a local exchange carrier (LEC)
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
completes a call, that LEC is responsible
for compensation. The Payphone
Compensation Rules define these
responsible carriers as ‘‘Completing
Carriers’’ and require them to develop
their own system of tracking calls to
completion, the accuracy of which must
be confirmed and attested to by a third
party auditor. Completing Carriers are
required to compensate the PSPs on a
quarterly basis for calls that are
completed on the Competing Carriers’
platforms; to provide quarterly reports
to the PSPs; and their chief financial
officers (CFOs) must attest to the
accuracy of the quarterly payment
amount. The Payphone Compensation
Rules also imposed reporting
requirements on an ‘‘Intermediate
Carrier,’’ defined in the rules as ‘‘a
facilities-based long distance carrier that
switches payphone calls to other
facilities-based long distance carriers.’’
Additionally, the Payphone
Compensation Rules also give parties
flexibility to agree to alternative
compensation arrangements (ACA) so
that small Completing Carriers may
avoid the expense of instituting a
tracking system and undergoing an
audit.
III. Discussion
3. In the Order on Reconsideration,
the Commission considers four petitions
for reconsideration filed in response to
the Report and Order in this docket. The
Order on Reconsideration clarifies and
modifies the Report and Order by
adopting the following changes: (1)
Clarifying that a Completing Carrier
must give a PSP adequate notice of an
ACA prior to its effective date, with
sufficient time for the PSP to object to
an ACA, and prior to the termination of
an ACA; (2) clarifying that, in a
complaint proceeding under the
Payphone Compensation Rules, a
Completing Carrier may assert as an
affirmative defense that the PSP’s
objection to an ACA was unreasonable;
(3) clarifying that Completing Carriers
are required to report only completed
calls in their quarterly reports; (4)
extending the time period that carriers
must retain certain payphone records,
for dispute resolution purposes, from 18
to 27 months; (5) clarifying that
quarterly reports should use industry
standard formats; (6) clarifying the
responsibilities of LECs under the
Payphone Compensation Rules; (7)
clarifying that a Completing Carrier may
post its System Audit Report and
§ 64.1320(e) statement on its website or
on a clearinghouse’s website, instead of
transmitting these documents to every
PSP; (8) clarifying that a Completing
Carrier’s CFO may issue a single blanket
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 5, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 708-720]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-89]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP-2004-0394; FRL-7689-7]
Thiamethoxam; Pesticide Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for combined residues
of thiamethoxam and its metabolite, (CGA-322704) in or on legume
vegetables, root vegetables (except sugar beet), strawberries,
bushberries, juneberries, lingonberries, salal, cranberries, spearmint,
peppermint, rapeseed, mustard, flax, safflower, crambe, borage, and
potatoes. In addition, the tolerance expression for tuberous and corm
vegetable crop subgroup (1C) is revised to a tolerance expression for
tuberous and corm crop subgroup (except potato) (1D). Syngenta Crop
Protection, Inc. and Interregional Research Project 4 requested this
tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as
amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA).
DATES: This regulation is effective January 5, 2005. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before March 7, 2005.
ADDRESSES: To submit a written objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in Unit VI. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
identification (ID) number OPP-2004-0394. All documents in the docket
are listed in the EDOCKET index at https://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although
listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in EDOCKET or in hard copy at the Public Information and Records
Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall 2, 1801 South
Bell St., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket
telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dani Daniel, Registration Division
(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-5409; e-mail address: daniel.dani@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
Crop production (NAICS 111), e.g., agricultural workers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers.
Animal production (NAICS 112), e.g., cattle ranchers and
farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
Food manufacturing (NAICS 311), e.g., agricultural
workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers;
ranchers; pesticide applicators.
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 32532), e.g., agricultural
workers; commercial applicators; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and
floriculture workers; residential users.
[[Page 709]]
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of This Document and Other
Related Information?
In addition to using EDOCKET (https://www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may
access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA
Internet under the ``Federal Register'' listings at https://www.epa.gov/
fedrgstr/. A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
is available at E-CFR Beta Site Two at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/.
To access the OPPTS Harmonized Guidelines referenced in this document,
go directly to the guidelines at https://www.epa.gpo/opptsfrs/home/
guidelin.htm/.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of June 2, 2004 (69 FR 31110) (FRL-7361-1),
EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of pesticide petitions (PP 2E6363,
3E6781, 3E6800, 3E6805, 3E6806, 3E6807, 4E6819, and 0F6142) by Syngenta
Crop Protection, Inc., P.O. Box 18300 Greensboro, NC 27419-8300, and
Interregional Research Project 4 (IR-4), 681 US Highway 1 South, North
Brunswick, NJ 08902-3390. The petitions requested that 40 CFR 180.565
be amended by establishing tolerances for combined residues of the
insecticide thiamethoxam, 3-[(2-chloro-5-thiazolyl)methyl]tetrahydro-5-
methyl-N-nitro-4H-1,3,5-oxadiazin-4-imine and its metabolite CGA-322704
(N-(2-chloro-thiazol-5-ylmethyl)-N`-methyl-N'`-nitro-guanidine), in or
on legume vegetables group 6 at 0.02 parts per million (ppm) (3E6805),
peppermint and spearmint at 4.0 ppm (2E6363); root vegetables (except
sugar beet) crop subgroup 1B at 0.1 ppm and for radish tops at 0.80 ppm
(4E6819); strawberry at 0.30 ppm (3E6800); cranberry at 0.01 ppm
(3E6781); bushberry crop subgroup 13B and juneberry, lingonberry and
salal at 0.25 ppm (3E6807); rapeseed seed, mustard seed, flax seed,
safflower seed, crambe seed, and borage seed at 0.02 ppm (3E6806); and
potato at 0.25 ppm (0F6142). In addition, due to the establishment of
the individual tolerance for potato, it was requested that the
tolerance expression for tuberous and corm crop subgroup 1C be revised
to a tolerance expression for tuberous and corm (except potato) crop
subgroup 1D. That notice included a summary of these petitions prepared
by Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. and IR-4, the registrant. As a result
of the residue data submitted to support these requests, the proposed
tolerance level for peppermint and spearmint was subsequently revised
to 1.5 ppm; the proposed tolerance level for root vegetables (except
sugar beet) crop subgroup 1B was subsequently revised to 0.02 ppm; the
proposed tolerance level for bushberry crop subgroup 13B and juneberry,
lingonberry and salal was subsequently revised to 0.20 ppm; and the
proposed tolerance for cranberry was revised to 0.02 ppm. There were no
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the
regulatory requirements of section 408 of FFDCA and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see the final rule on
Bifenthrin Pesticide Tolerances (62 FR 62961, November 26, 1997) (FRL-
5754-7).
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure, consistent with section
408(b)(2) of FFDCA, for a tolerance for combined residues of
thiamethoxam and its metabolite CGA-322704 on legume vegetables group 6
at 0.02 ppm, peppermint and spearmint at 1.5 ppm; root vegetables
(except sugar beet) crop subgroup 1B at 0.02 ppm and for radish tops at
0.80 ppm; strawberry at 0.30 ppm; cranberry at 0.02 ppm; bushberry crop
subgroup 13B and juneberry, lingonberry and salal at 0.20 ppm; rapeseed
seed, mustard seed, flax seed, safflower seed, crambe seed, and borage
seed at 0.02 ppm; and potato at 0.25 ppm. In addition, due to the
establishment of the individual tolerance for potato, it was requested
that the tolerance expression for tuberous and corm crop subgroup 1C be
revised to a tolerance expression for tuberous and corm (except potato)
crop subgroup 1D. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated
with establishing the tolerance follows.
In assessing the human health risks associated with the existing
and proposed uses of thiamethoxam, EPA has included exposure to
thiamethoxam as well as its metabolite CGA-322704 when evaluating
exposure from the dietary (food only) pathway. This approach was
developed when the Agency received the first food-use request for
registration of thiamethoxam and determined that the CGA-322704
metabolite/degradate, as well as the parent compound, are residues of
concern in food; no exposure to CGA-322704 in drinking water was
considered likely following application of thiamethoxam. At the time,
toxicological information regarding CGA-322704 was not available, and
it was assumed that thiamethoxam and this metabolite are
toxicologically equivalent for estimation of dietary risk.
Subsequently, the Agency received a petition requesting registration of
the insecticide clothianidin. Upon review of that petition, the Agency
discovered that CGA-322704 and clothianidin are identical. With the
registration of clothianidin uses, the Agency has largely complete
toxicological databases for both thiamethoxam and CGA-322704 (referred
to in the remainder of this rule as clothianidin). While some of the
toxic effects observed following dosing with the two active ingredients
are similar, it is not clear that they are toxicologically equivalent.
To date, the Agency has not formally examined the toxicity data to
determine if it is appropriate to separate exposure to the parent
compound thiamethoxam
[[Page 710]]
from exposure to thiamethoxam's metabolite clothianidin when assessing
the aggregate risk associated with thiamethoxam tolerances. Therefore,
EPA has taken the very conservative approach of analzying the non-
cancer risk of thiamethoxam by both (1) aggregating exposure to
thiamethoxam and its metabolite clothianidin resulting from use of
thiamethoxam and clothianidin residues resulting from use of
clothianidin as an active ingredient and comparing this aggregate
exposure to relevant endpoints for thiamethoxam; and (2) aggregating
exposure to clothianidin resulting from thiamethoxam use and from use
of clothianidin as an active ingredient and comparing this aggregate
exposure to relevant endpoints for clothianidin. EPA has taken the
further conservative step of assuming that, in instances where both
thiamethoxam and clothianidin are registered for use on a crop, both
pesticides will, in fact, be used on that crop. Despite this very
conservative approach, thiamethoxam non-cancer risks (taking into
account clothianidin exposure) are well below the Agency's level of
concern (LOC).
Pending formal reconsideration of toxicological equivalency for
thiamethoxam and the clothianidin metabolite, aggregate risks from both
thiamethoxam and clothianidin are presented below.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. The nature of the toxic effects caused by thiamethoxam as
well as the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) and the lowest
observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies
reviewed are discussed in the Federal Register of September 17, 2003
(68 FR 54386) (FRL-7327-5). The nature of the toxic effects caused by
the metabolite clothianidin are discussed in the Federal Register of
May 30, 2003 (68 FR 32390) (FRL-7306-8).
B. Toxicological Endpoints
The dose at which the NOAEL from the toxicology study identified as
appropriate for use in risk assessment is used to estimate the
toxicological LOC. However, the LOAEL is sometimes used for risk
assessment if no NOAEL was achieved in the toxicology study selected.
An uncertainty factor (UF) is applied to reflect uncertainties inherent
in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and in the
variations in sensitivity among members of the human population as well
as other unknowns. An UF of 100 is routinely used, 10X to account for
interspecies differences and 10X for intraspecies differences.
Three other types of safety or uncertainty factors may be used:
``Traditional uncertainty factors;'' the ``special FQPA safety
factor;'' and the ``default FQPA safety factor.'' By the term
``traditional uncertainty factor,'' EPA is referring to those
additional uncertainty factors used prior to FQPA passage to account
for database deficiencies. These traditional uncertainty factors have
been incorporated by the FQPA into the additional safety factor for the
protection of infants and children. The term ``special FQPA safety
factor'' refers to those safety factors that are deemed necessary for
the protection of infants and children primarily as a result of the
FQPA. The ``default FQPA safety factor'' is the additional 10X safety
factor that is mandated by the statute unless it is decided that there
are reliable data to choose a different additional factor (potentially
a traditional uncertainty factor or a special FQPA safety factor).
For dietary risk assessment (other than cancer) the Agency uses the
UF to calculate an acute or chronic reference dose (acute RfD or
chronic RfD) where the RfD is equal to the NOAEL divided by an UF of
100 to account for interspecies and intraspecies differences and any
traditional uncertainty factors deemed appropriate (RfD = NOAEL/UF).
Where a special FQPA safety factor or the default FQPA safety factor is
used, this additional factor is applied to the RfD by dividing the RfD
by such additional factor. The acute or chronic Population Adjusted
Dose (aPAD or cPAD) is a modification of the RfD to accommodate this
type of safety factor.
For non-dietary risk assessments (other than cancer) the UF is used
to determine the LOC. For example, when 100 is the appropriate UF (10X
to account for interspecies differences and 10X for intraspecies
differences) the LOC is 100. To estimate risk, a ratio of the NOAEL to
exposures (margin of exposure (MOE) = NOAEL/exposure) is calculated and
compared to the LOC.
The linear default risk methodology (Q*) is the primary method
currently used by the Agency to quantify carcinogenic risk. The Q*
approach assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree
of cancer risk. A Q* is calculated and used to estimate risk which
represents a probability of occurrence of additional cancer cases
(e.g., risk). An example of how such a probability risk is expressed
would be to describe the risk as one in one hundred thousand (1 x
10-\5\), one in a million (1 x 10-\6\), or one in
ten million (1 x 10-\7\). Under certain specific
circumstances, MOE calculations will be used for the carcinogenic risk
assessment. In this non-linear approach, a ``point of departure'' is
identified below which carcinogenic effects are not expected. The point
of departure is typically a NOAEL based on an endpoint related to
cancer effects though it may be a different value derived from the dose
response curve. To estimate risk, a ratio of the point of departure to
exposure (MOEcancer = point of departure/exposures) is
calculated.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for thiamethoxam used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit:
Table 1.--Summary of Toxicological Dose and Endpoints for Thiamethoxam for Use in Human Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dose Used in Risk FQPA SF and LOC for Study and Toxicological
Exposure Scenario Assessment, UF Risk Assessment Effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (general population NOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day FQPA SF = 10 Acute mammalian
including infants and children) UF = 100............... aPAD = acute RfD / FQPA neurotoxicity study in
Acute RfD = 1 mg/kg/day SF. the rat
= 0.1 mg/kg/day........ LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day
based on treatment-
related
neurobehavioral
effects observed in
the FOB and LMA
testing (drooped
palpebral closure,
decreased rectal
temperature and
locomotor activity,
increased forelimb
grip strength)
----------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 711]]
Chronic dietary (all populations) NOAEL = 0.6 mg/kg/day FQPA SF = 10 2-Generation
UF = 100............... cPAD = chronic RfD / reproduction study
Chronic RfD = 0.006 mg/ FQPA SF. LOAEL = 1.8 mg/kg/day
kg/day. = 0.0006 mg/kg/day.... based on increased
incidence and severity
of tubular atrophy in
testes of F\1\
generation males.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Oral nondietary (all durations) NOAEL = 0.6 mg/kg/day Residential LOC for MOE 2-Generation
= 1,000 reproduction study
LOAEL = 1.8 mg/kg/day
based on increased
incidence and severity
of tubular atrophy in
testes of F\1\
generation males.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dermal (all durations) Oral study Resdiential LOC for MOE 2-Generation
NOAEL = 0.6 mg/kg/day = 1,000 reproduction study
(dermal absorption LOAEL = 1.8 mg/kg/day
rate = 27%). based on increased
incidence and severity
of tubular atrophy in
testes of F\1\
generation males.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Inhalation (all durations) Oral study NOAEL = 0.6 Residential LOC for MOE 2-Generation
mg/kg/day(inhalation = 1,000 reproduction study
absorption rate = LOAEL = 1.8 mg/kg/day
100%) based on increased
incidence and severity
of tubular atrophy in
testes of F\1\
generation males.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation) Likely carcinogen for humans based on increased incidence of
hepatocellular adenomas and carcinomas in male and female mice.
Quantification of risk based on most potent unit risk: Male mouse liver
adenoma and/or carcinoma combined tumor rate. The upper bound estimate
of unit risk, Q1* (mg/kg/day)\-\2 is 3.77 x 10\-\2 in human equivalents.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for the metabolite
clothianidin used for human risk assessment is shown in Table 2 of this
unit:
Table 2.--Summary of Toxicological Dose and Endpoints for Clothianidin for Use in Human Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dose Used in Risk
Assessment,
Exposure Scenario Interspecies and Special FQPA SF and LOC Study and Toxicological
Intraspecies and any for Risk Assessment Effects
Traditional UF
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (Females 13-50 years of Developmental NOAEL = FQPA SF = 1 Developmental rabbit
age) 25 mg/kg/day aPAD = acute RfD / FQPA study
UF = 1,000............. SF. Developmental LOAEL =
Acute RfD = 0.025 mg/kg = 0.025 mg/kg.......... 75 mg/kg/day based on
an increased litter
incidence of a missing
lobe of the lung.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (General population) NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day FQPA SF = 1 Special Neurotoxicity/
UF = 1,000............. aPAD = acute RfD / FQPA Pharmacology Study in
Acute RfD = 0.025 mg/kg SF. Mice and Rats
= 0.025 mg/kg.......... LOAEL = 50 mg/kg based
on transient signs of
decreased spontaneous
motor activity,
tremors and deep
respirations.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations) Offspring NOAEL = 9.8 FQPA SF = 1 2-Generation
mg/kg/day cPAD = chronic RfD / Reproduction Study
UF = 1,000............. FQPA SF = 0.0098 mg/kg/ Offspring LOAEL = 31.2
Chronic RfD = 0.0098 mg/ day. mg/kg/day based on
kg/day. decreased mean body
weight gain and
delayed sexual
maturation, decreased
absolute thymus
weights in F\1\ pups
and an increase in
stillbirths in both
generations.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Incidental Oral (All durations) NOAEL = 9.8 mg/kg/day Residential LOC for MOE 2-Generation
= 1,000 reproduction study
Offspring LOAEL = 31.2
mg/kg/day based on
decreased mean body
weight gain and
delayed sexual
maturation, decreased
absolute thymus
weights in F\1\ pups
and an increase in
stillbirths in both
generations.
----------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 712]]
Dermal (All durations) Oral study Residential LOC for MOE 2-Generation
NOAEL = 9.8 mg/kg/day = 1,000 reproduction study
(dermal absorption Offspring LOAEL = 31.2
rate = 1%). mg/kg/day based on
decreased mean body
weight gain and
delayed sexual
maturation, decreased
absolute thymus
weights in F\1\ pups
and an increase in
stillbirths in both
generations.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Inhalation (All durations) Oral study Residential LOC for MOE 2-Generation
NOAEL = 9.8 mg/kg/day = 1,000 reproduction study
(inhalation absorption Offspring LOAEL = 31.2
rate = 100%). mg/kg/day based on
decreased mean body
weight gain and
delayed sexual
maturation, decreased
absolute thymus
weights in F\1\ pups
and an increase in
stillbirths in both
generations.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. Tolerances have been
established (40 CFR 180.565) for the combined residues of thiamethoxam
and its metabolite clothianidin in or on a variety of raw agricultural
commodities. Tolerances for thiamethoxam are established on barley,
canola, cotton, sorghum, wheat, imported coffee, pecan, stone fruit,
succulent bean, sunflower, tuberous and corm vegetables crop subgroup,
fruiting vegetables, crop group, tomato paste, cucurbit vegetables crop
group, pome fruits crop group, field corn forage, field corn stover,
sweet corn stover, field corn grain, popcorn grain, sweet corn (kernal
and cob with husk removed), milk, and the meat and meat by products of
cattle, goats, horses, and sheep. Since clothianidin is a major
metabolite of thiamethoxam, residues of clothianidin that would
theoretically result from registered and pending uses of clothianidin
and residues that would theoretically result from the metabolism of
thiamethoxam are included in the analysis. Risk assessments were
conducted by EPA to assess dietary exposures from thiamethoxam in food
as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Acute dietary risk assessments are performed for
a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a 1-day or
single exposure. In conducting the acute dietary risk assessment EPA
used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food
Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID\TM\), which incorporates food
consumption data as reported by respondents in the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1994-1996 and 1998 Nationwide
Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII), and
accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity. The following
assumptions were made for the acute exposure assessments: EPA conducted
the acute dietary exposure analysis based on highly conservative
assumptions. The residues of concern for the acute analysis are
thiamethoxam and its metabolite clothianidin. The assessment for
thiamethoxam assumed that 100% of the registered and proposed crops
were treated and that all treated crops and livestock had residues of
concern at the tolerance level. The general U.S. population and all
population subgroups have exposure and risk estimates which are below
EPA's LOC (i.e., the aPADs are all below 100%). The most highly exposed
subgroup is children 1 to 2 years of age. The exposure estimate for
children 1 to 2 years of age is 0.01099 mg/kg/day, which is equivalent
to 11% of the aPAD.
For the metabolite clothianidin, the acute analysis is a
conservative assessment that was based on tolerance level residues and
the assumption of 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for established and
proposed clothianidin uses. For the commodities that have both
thiamethoxam tolerances and established or proposed clothianidin
tolerances (i.e., sweet corn, field corn, pop corn, canola, milk, and
pome fruit), the proposed clothianidin tolerances are added to the
residues that could result from use of thiamethoxam. The general U.S.
population and all population subgroups have exposure and risk
estimates which are below EPA's LOC (i.e., the aPADs are all below
100%). The most highly exposed population subgroup is infants less than
1 year old, which utilizes 80% of the aPAD.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary risk
assessment EPA used the DEEM-FCID\TM\, which incorporates food
consumption data as reported by respondents in the USDA 1994-1996 and
1998 Nationwide CSFII, and accumulated exposure to the chemical for
each commodity. The following assumptions were made for the chronic
exposure assessments: The residues of concern for the chronic analysis
are thiamethoxam and its metabolite clothianidin. The chronic analysis
for thiamethoxam was based on anticipated residues in the form of
average field trial residue values, and the analysis included percent
crop estimates. The general U.S. population and all population
subgroups have exposure and risk estimates which are below EPA's LOC
(i.e., the cPADs are all below 100%). The most highly exposed subgroup
is children 1 to 2 years of age. The exposure estimate for children 1
to 2 years of age is 0.000103 mg/kg/day, which is equivalent to 17% of
the cPAD.
For clothianidin, the chronic analysis is a relatively conservative
assessment that was based on tolerance level residues and the
assumption of 100% crop treated for established and proposed
clothianidin uses, with the exception of anticipated residues (AR) for
apples and pears. For the commodities that have both thiamethoxam
tolerances and established or proposed clothianidin tolerances (i.e.,
sweet corn, field corn, pop corn, canola, and milk), the
[[Page 713]]
proposed clothianidin tolerances are added to the residues that could
result from use of thiamethoxam. For apples and pears, the highest
average field trial (HAFT) levels from the residue field trials were
added to the residues that could result from use of thiamethoxam. The
general U.S. population and all population subgroups have exposure and
risk estimates which are below EPA's LOC (i.e., the cPADs are all below
100%). The most highly exposed population subgroup is children 1 to 2
years of age, which utilizes 15% of the cPAD.
iii. Cancer. The residue of concern for the cancer analysis is
thiamethoxam, per se. The residues of its metabolite clothianidin were
removed from the cancer analysis because the metabolite was found to be
``not likely to be carcinogenic to humans'' when it was evaluated as an
active ingredient. The cancer analysis was based on average field trial
residue values as well as PCT estimates. The estimated dietary exposure
to the U.S. population is 0.000263 mg/kg/day.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. Section 408(b)(2)(E)
of the FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and information on
the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in food and the
actual levels of pesticide chemicals that have been measured in food.
If EPA relies on such information, EPA must pursuant to section
408(f)(1) require that data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is
established, modified, or left in effect, demonstrating that the levels
in food are not above the levels anticipated. Following the initial
data submission, EPA is authorized to require similar data on a time
frame it deems appropriate. For the present action, EPA will issue such
data call-ins for information relating to anticipated residues as are
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under FFDCA
section 408(f)(1). Such data call-ins will be required to be submitted
no later than 5 years from the date of issuance of this tolerance.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary
risk only if the Agency can make the following findings: Condition 1,
that the data used are reliable and provide a valid basis to show what
percentage of the food derived from such crop is likely to contain such
pesticide residue; Condition 2, that the exposure estimate does not
underestimate exposure for any significant subpopulation group; and
Condition 3, if data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area. In addition, the
Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any estimates used. To
provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate of PCT as required
by section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA, EPA may require registrants to submit
data on PCT.
The Agency used PCT information as follows:For existing uses, the
Agency used estimates of PCT for the chronic exposure assessment which
was determined using USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service
(NASS) Usage Data (1999-2003) and EPA Proprietary Usage Data (2001-
2003). The chronic PCT estimates that were used for existing uses are
shown in Table 3:
Table 3.--Thiamethoxam Estimates of Crop Treated for Existing Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent Crop
Commodity Treated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apples............................................... 5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barley............................................... 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canola............................................... 55
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cantaloupes.......................................... 13
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Casabas.............................................. 44
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cottonseed........................................... 20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crabapples........................................... 20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cucumbers............................................ 5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Field corn, grain.................................... 6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fruiting vegetables (except cucurbits - Crop group 8) 15
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Honeydew melons...................................... 13
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loquats.............................................. 53
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pears................................................ 9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Popcorn.............................................. 6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potatoes............................................. 41
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pumpkins............................................. 44
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quinces.............................................. 53
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorghum (including milo)............................. 9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Squash............................................... 44
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunflowers........................................... 25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sweet corn........................................... 6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tuberous and Corm Vegetables - Crop subgroup 1C 33
(except potatoes)...................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Watermelons.......................................... 13
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wheat................................................ 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the new uses, the Agency used PCT estimates for the chronic
exposure assessment based on usage data and market share projections as
follows. Market share projections for the new uses for thiamethoxam
were obtained from the registrant and compared to 1999-2003 USDA NASS
Usage Data and EPA 2001-2003 Proprietary Usage Data for the
historically, most widely used insecticide for control of insect pests
for each crop. As a result of this comparison, the highest, most
conservative PCT estimate for each crop was used for the chronic
exposure assessment. These highly conservative estimates should not
underestimate actual usage of thiamethoxam on the new crops/sites. To
further support the reliability of these PCT estimates, as a condition
of registration, the registrant will be required to agree to report
annually on the market share attained for the new uses for which
thiamethoxam is registered. As a condition of registration, they will
also be required to agree to mitigate dietary risk as deemed
appropriate by the Agency should the market share data raise a concern
for increased dietary risk. The Agency will then compare that market
share information with the PCT estimates used to evaluate potential
dietary risk. In those instances where percent market share is
approaching or exceeding the predicted PCT estimate used in the
Agency's risk assessment, EPA will conduct a new dietary risk
assessment to evaluate the new dietary risk. If the market share data
raise a concern for increased pesticide risk, the Agency will act to
mitigate that dietary risk and could employ several approaches,
including but not limited to production caps, geographical limitations,
removal of uses, or other means deemed appropriate by the Agency. The
chronic PCT estimates that were used for existing uses are shown in
Table 4:
[[Page 714]]
Table 4.--Thiamethoxam Estimates of Crop Treated for New Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent Crop
Commodity Treated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beans, lima.......................................... 38
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beans, snap.......................................... 37
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bushberries.......................................... 55
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrots.............................................. 20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cranberries.......................................... 29
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mint................................................. 9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peas, green processed................................ 36
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peas (including dried peas).......................... 44
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Soybeans............................................. 11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strawberries......................................... 46
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Agency believes that the three conditions listed in this Unit
III. have been met. With respect to Condition 1, PCT estimates are
derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are reliable
and have a valid basis. EPA uses a weighted average PCT for chronic
dietary exposure estimates. This weighted average PCT figure is derived
by averaging State-level data for a period of up to 10 years, and
weighting for the more robust and recent data. A weighted average of
the PCT reasonably represents a person's dietary exposure over a
lifetime, and is unlikely to underestimate exposure to an individual
because of the fact that pesticide use patterns (both regionally and
nationally) tend to change continuously over time, such that an
individual is unlikely to be exposed to more than the average PCT over
a lifetime. As to Conditions 2 and 3, regional consumption information
and consumption information for significant subpopulations is taken
into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating the
exposure of significant subpopulations including several regional
groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment
process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency
to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than
the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does
not have available information on the regional consumption of food to
which thiamethoxam may be applied in a particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency lacks
sufficient monitoring exposure data to complete a comprehensive dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment for thiamethoxam in drinking
water. Because the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data,
drinking water concentration estimates are made by reliance on
simulation or modeling taking into account data on the physical
characteristics of thiamethoxam.
The Agency uses the FQPA Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) or
the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/
EXAMS), to produce estimates of pesticide concentrations in an index
reservoir. The screening concentration in ground water (SCIGROW) model
is used to predict pesticide concentrations in shallow ground water.
For a screening-level assessment for surface water EPA will use FIRST
(a Tier 1 model) before using PRZM/EXAMS (a Tier 2 model). The FIRST
model is a subset of the PRZM/EXAMS model that uses a specific high-end
runoff scenario for pesticides. Both FIRST and PRZM/EXAMS incorporate
an index reservoir environment, and both models include a percent crop
area factor as an adjustment to account for the maximum percent crop
coverage within a watershed or drainage basin.
None of these models include consideration of the impact processing
(mixing, dilution, or treatment) of raw water for distribution as
drinking water would likely have on the removal of pesticides from the
source water. The primary use of these models by the Agency at this
stage is to provide a screen for sorting out pesticides for which it is
unlikely that drinking water concentrations would exceed human health
LOC.
Since the models used are considered to be screening tools in the
risk assessment process, the Agency does not use estimated
environmental concentrations (EECs), which are the model estimates of a
pesticide's concentration in water. EECs derived from these models are
used to quantify drinking water exposure and risk as a %RfD or %PAD.
Instead drinking water levels of comparison (DWLOCs) are calculated and
used as a point of comparison against the model estimates of a
pesticide's concentration in water. DWLOCs are theoretical upper limits
on a pesticide's concentration in drinking water in light of total
aggregate exposure to a pesticide in food, and from residential uses.
Since DWLOCs address total aggregate exposure to thiamethoxam they are
further discussed in the aggregate risk sections in Unit E.
Based on the PRZM/EXAMS and SCIGROW models, the EECs of
thiamethoxam for acute exposures are estimated to be 11.4 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and 5 ppb for ground water. The EECs
for chronic non-cancer exposures are estimated to be 0.77 ppb for
surface water and 1.94 ppb for ground water. The EECs for cancer
exposures are estimated to be 0.31 ppb for surface water and 1.94 ppb
for ground water.
Clothianidin is not a significant degradate of thiamethoxam in
water. Therefore, residues of clothianidin in water were estimated
based on applications of clothianidin as an active ingredient. Based on
the FIRST and SCIGROW models, the EECs of clothianidin for acute
exposures are estimated to be 7.29 parts per billion (ppb) for surface
water and 5.84 ppb for ground water. The EECs for chronic exposures are
estimated to be 1.35 ppb for surface water and 5.84 ppb for ground
water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Thiamethoxam is not
registered for use on any sites that would result in residential
exposure.
Clothianidin is currently registered for use on turfgrasses.
Exposures and risk resulting from clothianidin residues on turfgrasses
are included in the aggregate risk assessment for clothianidin.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative
risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to thiamethoxam and any other
substances and thiamethoxam does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that thiamethoxam has
a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information
regarding EPA's efforts to determine
[[Page 715]]
which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see the policy statements
released by EPA's OPP concerning common mechanism determinations and
procedures for cumulating effects from substances found to have a
common mechanism on EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative/.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the data base on toxicity and exposure
unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of
safety will be safe for infants and children. Margins of safety are
incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly through use of a
MOE analysis or through using uncertainty (safety) factors in
calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable risk to humans. In
applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X
when reliable data do not support the choice of a different factor, or,
if reliable data are available, EPA uses a different additional safety
factor value based on the use of traditional uncertainty factors and/or
special FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The developmental toxicity
studies indicated no quantitative or qualitative evidence of increased
susceptibility of rat or rabbit fetus to in utero exposure based on the
fact that the developmental NOAELs are either higher than or equal to
the maternal NOAELs. However, the reproductive studies indicate effects
in males rats in the form of increased incidence and severity of
testicular tubular atrophy. These data are considered to be evidence of
increased quantitative susceptibility for male pups when compared to
the parents.
3. Conclusion. There is a complete toxicity data base for
thiamethoxam and exposure data are complete or are estimated based on
data that reasonably accounts for potential exposures. EPA determined
that the 10X special safety factor to protect infants and children
should be retained, based on the following factors: Effects on
endocrine organs observed across species; the significant decrease in
alanine amino transferase levels in the companion animal studies and in
the dog studies; the mode of action of this chemical in insects
(interferes with the nicotinic acetyl choline receptors of the insect's
nervous system); the transient clinical signs of neurotoxicity in
several studies across species; and the suggestive evidence of
increased quantitative susceptibility in the rat reproduction study.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
To estimate total aggregate exposure to a pesticide from food,
drinking water, and residential uses, the Agency calculates DWLOCs
which are used as a point of comparison against EECs. DWLOC values are
not regulatory standards for drinking water. DWLOCs are theoretical
upper limits on a pesticide's concentration in drinking water in light
of total aggregate exposure to a pesticide in food and residential
uses. In calculating a DWLOC, the Agency determines how much of the
acceptable exposure (i.e., the PAD) is available for exposure through
drinking water (e.g., allowable chronic water exposure (mg/kg/day) =
cPAD - (average food + residential exposure)). This allowable exposure
through drinking water is used to calculate a DWLOC.
A DWLOC will vary depending on the toxic endpoint, drinking water
consumption, and body weights. Default body weights and consumption
values as used by the EPA's Office of Water are used to calculate
DWLOCs: 2 liter (L)/70 kg (adult male), 2L/60 kg (adult female), and
1L/10 kg (child). Default body weights and drinking water consumption
values vary on an individual basis. This variation will be taken into
account in more refined screening-level and quantitative drinking water
exposure assessments. Different populations will have different DWLOCs.
Generally, a DWLOC is calculated for each type of risk assessment used:
Acute, short-term, intermediate-term, chronic, and cancer.
When EECs for surface water and ground water are less than the
calculated DWLOCs, EPA concludes with reasonable certainty that
exposures to the pesticide in drinking water (when considered along
with other sources of exposure for which EPA has reliable data) would
not result in unacceptable levels of aggregate human health risk at
this time. Because EPA considers the aggregate risk resulting from
multiple exposure pathways associated with a pesticide's uses, levels
of comparison in drinking water may vary as those uses change. If new
uses are added in the future, EPA will reassess the potential impacts
of residues of the pesticide in drinking water as a part of the
aggregate risk assessment process.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food to
thiamethoxam will occupy 4% of the aPAD for the U.S. population, 2% of
the aPAD for females 13 years and older, 10% of the aPAD for infants
less than one year old, and 11% of the aPAD for children 1 to 2 years
old. In addition, there is potential for acute dietary exposure to
thiamethoxam in drinking water. After calculating DWLOCs and comparing
them to the EECs for surface and ground water, EPA does not expect the
aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of the aPAD, as shown in Table 5 of
this unit:
Table 5.--Aggregate Risk Assessment for Acute Exposure to Thiamethoxam
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface Ground
Population Subgroup aPAD (mg/ % aPAD Water EEC Water EEC Acute DWLOC
kg) (Food) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General U.S. Population........................ 0.1 4 11.4 5 3,400
--------------------------------------------------------------
All infants (less than one year old)........... 0.1 10 11.4 5 900
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Children 1-2 years old......................... 0.1 11 11.4 5 890
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Females 13-49 years old........................ 0.1 2 11.4 5 2,900
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 716]]
Sources of clothianidin residues in food include uses of both
thiamethoxam and clothianidin. Toxicological doses and endpoints for
clothianidin were used to calculate risk. The acute dietary exposure
from food to the metabolite clothianidin will occupy 18% of the aPAD
for the U.S. population, 12% of the aPAD for females 13 years and
older, 80% of the aPAD for infants less than one year old, and 60% of
the aPAD for children 1 to 2 years old. In addition, there is potential
for acute dietary exposure to clothianidin in drinking water. After
calculating DWLOCs and comparing them to the EECs for surface water and
ground water, EPA does not expect the aggregate exposure to exceed 100%
of the aPAD, as shown in Table 6 of this unit:
Table 6.--Aggregate Risk Assessment for Acute Exposure to Clothianidin
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface Ground
Population Subgroup aPAD (mg/ % aPAD Water EEC Water EEC Acute DWLOC
kg) (Food) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General U.S. Population........................ 0.025 18 7.29 5.84 710
--------------------------------------------------------------
All infants (less than one year old)........... 0.025 80 7.29 5.84 48
--------------------------------------------------------------
Children 1-2 years old......................... 0.025 60 7.29 5.84 92
--------------------------------------------------------------
Females 13-49 years old........................ 0.025 12 7.29 5.84 640
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to
thiamethoxam from food will utilize 6% of the cPAD for the U.S.
population, 11% of the cPAD for infants less than one year old, and 17%
of the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old. There are no residential
uses for thiamethoxam that result in chronic residential exposure to
thiamethoxam. In addition, there is potential for chronic dietary
exposure to thiamethoxam in drinking water. After calculating DWLOCs
and comparing them to the EECs for surface and ground water, EPA does
not expect the aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of the cPAD, as shown
in Table 7 of this unit: