Two Isopropylamine Salts of Alkyl C4, 31365-31370 [05-10845]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 104 / Wednesday, June 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–10846 Filed 5–31–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP–2005–0115; FRL–7712–1]
Two Isopropylamine Salts of Alkyl C4
and Alkyl C8– 10 Ethoxyphosphate
esters; Exemption from the
Requirement of a Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
I. General Information
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
two exemptions from the requirement of
a tolerance for residues of 2propanamine, compound with aphosphono- w -butoxypoly (oxy-1,2ethanediyl) (2:1) and 2-propanamine,
compounds with polyethylene glycol
dihydrogen phosphate C8– 10- alkyl ether
(2:1), referred to as 2 isopropylamine
salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8– 10
ethoxyphosphate esters, when used as
inert ingredients (emulsifier, solvent
and cosolvent) in pesticide formulations
applied only to growing crops. Rhodia,
Inc, CN 7500, Cranbury, NJ 08512–7500,
submitted a petition to EPA under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), as amended by the Food
Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA),
requesting an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of these two chemicals.
DATES: This regulation is effective June
1, 2005. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
August 1, 2005.
ADDRESSES: To submit a written
objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in
Unit XI. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
identification (ID) number OPP–2005–
0115. 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
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:13 May 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
copy at the Public Information and
Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm.
119, Crystal Mall #2, 1801 S. 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:
Princess Campbell, Registration
Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (703) 308–8033; e-mail address:
campbell.princess@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY 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 code 111)
• Animal production (NAICS code
112)
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311)
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532)
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.
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 Get Electronic Documents
and Other Related Information?
In addition to using EDOCKET at
(https://www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
31365
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/.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of March 17,
1999 (64 FR 13195) (FRL–6065–5) EPA
issued a notice pursuant to section 408
of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a, as
amended by the FQPA (Public Law 104–
170), announcing the filing of pesticide
petitions (PP 8E4990 and 8E4956) by
Rhodia Inc, CN 7500, Cranbury, NJ
08512–7500.
The petitions requested that 40 CFR
180.1001(d) newly re-designated as 40
CFR 180.920 be amended to include
exemptions from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of 2-Propanamine,
compound with a-phosphono- wbutoxypoly (oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) (2:1)
(CAS Reg. No. 43140–31–2) and 2Propanamine, compounds with
polyethylene glycol dihydrogen
phosphate C8– 10- alkyl ether (2:1) (CAS
Reg. No. 431062–72–5). The 1999 notice
included a summary of the petition
prepared by the petitioner requesting, to
amend 40 CFR part 180 to establish an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for these two chemicals when
used as inert ingredients in pesticide
formulations applied only to growing
crops. There were no comments
received in response to the notice of
filing.
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA
allows EPA to establish an exemption
from the requirement for 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 the 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 the 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
E:\FR\FM\01JNR1.SGM
01JNR1
31366
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 104 / Wednesday, June 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
exposure to pesticide residues. First,
EPA determines the toxicity of
pesticides. Second, EPA examines
exposure to the pesticide through food,
drinking water, and through other
exposures that occur as a result of
pesticide use in residential settings.
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients
that are not active ingredients as defined
in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are
not limited to, the following types of
ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own):
Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as
polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and
diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose;
wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol
dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ‘‘inert’’ is not
intended to imply nontoxicity; the
ingredient may or may not be
chemically active. Generally, EPA has
exempted inert ingredients from the
requirement of a tolerance based on the
low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
relationship of this information 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
these 2 isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4
and alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters
are discussed in this unit.
IV. Toxicological Profile
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of the FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other
relevant information in support of this
action and considered its validity,
completeness and reliability and the
The petitioner has also submitted
supporting toxicity information to the
Agency which is summarized in Table
1.
The acute toxicity profile is presented
in Table 1.
A. Submitted Studies
TABLE 1: ACUTE TOXICITY PROFILE OF 2 ISOPROPYLAMINE SALTS OF ALKYL C4 AND ALKYL C8–
10
ETHOXYPHOSPHATE
ESTERS
Study
Result
Category
Acute oral (Rats)
LD50 > 2,000 mg/kg
III
Acute dermal (Rats)
LD50 > 2,000 mg/kg
III
Slightly irritating
III
Not irritating
III
Not a sensitizer
NA
Eye irritation
Dermal irritation (Rabbits)
Dermal sensitizer (GP)
The petitioner also submitted the
following mutagenicity assays, as
described in Table 2:
TABLE 2: MUTAGENICITY ASSAYS CONDUCTED USING:
Type of Assay
Test Culture
Ames
S. typhimurium TA 98, TA 100, TA
102, TA 1535, TA 1537
B. Structure Activity Relationship (SAR)
Assessment
Toxicity for these 2 isopropylamine
salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8– 10
ethoxyphosphate esters was assessed, in
part, by a process called structureactivity relationship (SAR). In this
process, the chemical’s structural
similarity to other chemicals (for which
data are available) is used to determine
toxicity. For human health, this process,
can be used to assess absorption and
metabolism, mutagenicity,
carcinogenicity, developmental and
reproductive effects, neurotoxicity,
systemic effects, immunotoxicity, and
sensitization and irritation. This is a
qualitative assessment using terms such
as good, not likely, poor, moderate, or
high.
VerDate jul<14>2003
Results
14:13 May 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
The SAR conclusions for these 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and
alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters and
several structurally related analogs were
as follows: Absorption would be poor
through the skin, good through the
lungs, and moderate through the GI
tract. Absorption of the amine will be
good through the lungs and GI tract
based on analogs. The SAR also
indicated a concern for lung toxicity
and irritation to mucous membranes if
inhaled based on surfactancy. There is
concern for neurotoxicity from the
amine salt. No concerns for
developmental or reproductive effects,
carcinogenicity, or mutagenicity were
noted. The overall rating for human
health is low/ moderate concern.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Negative
C. Conclusions
EPA has reviewed the toxicity data for
these 2 isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4
and alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters
and concludes as follows:
The acute toxicity data demonstrated
that these 2 isopropylamine salts of
alkyl C4 and alkyl C8– 10
ethoxyphosphate esters exhibited low
acute toxicity, Category III, based on the
Agency’s rating of toxicity categories I
through IV, highest to lowest. These 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and
alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters are
slight eye irritants. Other data reviewed
by the Agency indicated that these two
salts are not mutagenic.
The SAR indicated that absorption
would be poor through the skin, good
through the lungs, and moderate
through the GI tract. The SAR also
E:\FR\FM\01JNR1.SGM
01JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 104 / Wednesday, June 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
reflected the typical concerns for lung
toxicity and irritation to mucous
membranes if inhaled based on
surfactancy. Such concerns are
addressed by use of personal protection
equipment as determined by endproduct acute inhalation testing, or by
limitations on the amount of surfactant
in a formulated pesticide. There are also
typical concerns for neurotoxicity based
on the inclusion of an amine salt in the
chemical structure, and for lung toxicity
and irritation to mucous membranes if
inhaled based on surfactancy. As a
chemical class amine salts are generally
reported to have neurotoxic effects.
However, there is an overall lack of
documentation in the public literature
to support a specific concern for
neurotoxicity for isopropylamine salts.
The SAR rated these two
isopropylamine salts as low to moderate
for human health concerns. This rating
reflects the concerns associated with the
irritation to mucous membranes
commonly caused by surfactants.
The SAT in OPPT (Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics) has reviewed
information on several surfactants. As a
broad class of chemicals surfactants are
often corrosive and irritating to mucous
membranes. These properties make
animal toxicity testing of surfactants
difficult, and require interpretation of
the test results as to whether the effects
are attributed to the corrosive/irritant
effects or other mechanisms of toxicity.
Based on the SAR assessment, the
review and evaluation of the submitted
data, and given the Agency’s
understanding of the toxicological
properties of surfactants, EPA concludes
that these 2 isopropylamine salts of
alkyl C4 and alkyl C8– 10
ethoxyphosphate esters are of lower
toxicity. There is a concern for
corrosive/irritation effects of these 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and
alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters.
Based on these concerns which are
those of surfactants as a class, EPA is
requiring a limitation on the use of these
2 isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and
alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters, not
to exceed 15% in the formulated
product. Based on previously conducted
quantitative and qualitative risk
assessments on related surfactant
chemicals which the Agency has
exempted from the requirement of a
tolerance, the Agency believes that this
limitation is sufficiently protective for
the corrosive effects common to the
surfactancy of these two salts.
V. Aggregate Exposures
In examining aggregate exposure,
section 408 of the FFDCA directs EPA
to consider available information
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:13 May 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
concerning exposures from the pesticide
residue in food and all other nonoccupational exposures, including
drinking water from ground water or
surface water and exposure through
pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or
buildings (residential and other indoor
uses).
EPA establishes exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance only in those
cases where it can be clearly
demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide
chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no
appreciable risks to human health. In
order to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the
toxicity of the inert in conjunction with
possible exposure to residues of the
inert ingredient through food, drinking
water, and through other exposures that
occur as a result of pesticide use in
residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a finite tolerance is not
necessary to ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be
established.
1. Dietary exposure — Food. In order
to assess dietary exposure the Agency
considered that these two
isopropylamine salts could be present in
all raw and processed agricultural
commodities. The Agency has estimated
a generic dietary exposure estimate for
an inert ingredient of 0.12 milligrams/
kilogram/day (mg/kg/day). To assure
that the exposure is not underestimated,
it is assumed that the inert ingredients
are used on all crops and 100% of all
crops are ‘‘treated’’ with the inert
ingredient. The generic dietary exposure
estimate is based on an application rate
of 5 pounds per acre. Information from
the petitioner indicates that the
anticipated use rate of these 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and
alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters is
expected to be much less than one
pound per acre. The expected dietary
exposure estimate would therefore be
considerably less than 0.024 mg/kg/day.
Given the low levels of exposure and
the low systemic toxicity of these 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and
alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters, the
concern for risk to human health is low.
2. Drinking water. Based on its
biodegradation models, the Agency
estimated that the time for complete
ultimate biodegradation is weeks to
months. There is also strong to very
strong sorption to soils and sediments.
Due to the strong adherence to soils and
sediments, and ready biodegradation the
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
31367
substances would only be minimally
available in surface waters. Thus, only
low drinking water exposure is
expected, and the concern for risk to
human health is low.
VI. Cumulative Effects
Section 408 (b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance or tolerance exemption, the
Agency consider ‘‘available
information’’ concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular chemical’s
residues and ‘‘other substances that
have a common mechanism of toxicity.’’
Unlike other pesticide chemicals 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 these 2 isopropylamine
salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8– 10
ethoxyphosphate esters and any other
substances. These 2 isopropylamine
salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8– 10
ethoxyphosphate esters do not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
not assumed that these 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and
alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters have
a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see the policy statements
released by EPA’s Office of Pesticide
Programs concerning common
mechanism determinations and
procedures for cumulating effects from
substances found to have a common
mechanism on EPA’s website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/.
VII. Safety Factor for the Protection of
Infants and Children
FFDCA section 408 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 unless EPA
concludes that a different margin of
safety will be safe for infants and
children. For 2 isopropylamine salts of
alkyl C4 and alkyl C8– 10
ethoxyphosphate esters, the SAR did
not identify any concerns for
developmental or reproductive toxicity.
The identified concerns for 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and
alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters are
corrosion/irritation. EPA has not used a
safety factor analysis to assess the risk.
E:\FR\FM\01JNR1.SGM
01JNR1
31368
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 104 / Wednesday, June 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
For the same reasons a tenfold safety
factor is unnecessary.
Levels (MRLs) been established for any
food crops at this time.
VIII. Determination of Safety for U.S.
Population
X. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the
requirement for a tolerance is
established for 2-Propanamine,
compound with a-phosphono -wbutoxypoly (oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) (2:1)
(CAS Reg. No. 43140–31–2) and 2Propanamine, compounds with
polyethylene glycol dihydrogen
phosphate C8– 10- alkyl ether (2:1) (CAS
Reg. No. 431062–72–5).
Based on the information in this
preamble, EPA concludes that there is a
reasonable certainty of no harm from
aggregate exposure to residues of 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and
alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters, and
that under reasonably foreseeable
circumstances aggregate exposure to 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and
alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters will
pose no appreciable risk to human
health. Accordingly, EPA finds that
exempting 2-Propanamine, compound
with a-phosphono -w- butoxypoly (oxy1,2-ethanediyl) (2:1) (CAS Reg. No.
43140–31–2)and 2-Propanamine,
compounds with polyethylene glycol
dihydrogen phosphate C8– 10- alkyl ether
(2:1) (CAS Reg. No. 431062–72–5) from
the requirement of a tolerance will be
safe for the general population
including infants and children.
IX. Other Considerations
A. Endocrine Disruptors
FQPA requires EPA to develop a
screening program to determine whether
certain substances, including all
pesticide chemicals (both inert and
active ingredients), ‘‘may have an effect
in humans that is similar to an effect
produced by a naturally occurring
estrogen, or such other endocrine effect
. . .’’ EPA has been working with
interested stakeholders to develop a
screening and testing program as well as
a priority setting scheme. As the Agency
proceeds with implementation of this
program, further testing of these
products, 2 isopropylamine salts of
alkyl C4 and alkyl C8– 10
ethoxyphosphate esters, for endocrine
effects may be required.
B. Analytical Method(s)
An analytical method is not required
for enforcement purposes since the
Agency is establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance
without any numerical limitation.
C. Existing Exemptions
There are no existing tolerances or
tolerance exemptions for these 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and
alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters.
D. International Tolerances
The Agency is not aware of any
country requiring a tolerance for these 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and
alkyl C8– 10 ethoxyphosphate esters nor
have any CODEX Maximum Residue
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:13 May 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
XI. Objections and Hearing Requests
Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as
amended by the 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 the
FFDCA by the FQPA, EPA will continue
to use those procedures, with
appropriate adjustments, until the
necessary modifications can be made.
The new section 408(g) of the 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 the FFDCA, as was
provided in the old FFDCA sections 408
and 409 of the 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–2005–0115 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 August 1, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
information as CBI. Information so
marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
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 XI.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–2005–0115, 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\01JNR1.SGM
01JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 104 / Wednesday, June 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
XII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes an
exemption from the tolerance
requirement under section 408(d) of the
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 the FFDCA,
such as the exemption in this final rule,
do not require the issuance of a
proposed rule, the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not apply. In
addition, the Agency has determined
that this action will not have a
substantial direct effect on States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Executive Order 13132 requires
EPA to develop an accountable process
to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies
that have federalism implications’’ is
defined in the Executive Order to
include regulations that have
‘‘substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’ This final rule
directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers and food
retailers, not States. This action does not
alter the relationships or distribution of
power and responsibilities established
by Congress in the preemption
provisions of section 408(n)(4) of 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.
XIII. 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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: May 20, 2005.
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. In § 180.920, the table is amended by
adding alphabetically the following inert
ingredients to read as follows:
I
§ 180.920 Inert ingredients used preharvest; exemptions from the requirement
of a tolerance.
*
*
Inert ingredients
*
*
*
2-Propanamine, compound with a-phosphono -w- butoxypoly (oxy1,2-ethanediyl) (2:1) (CAS Reg. No. 43140–31–2).
2-Propanamine, compounds with polyethylene glycol dihydrogen
phosphate C8– 10- alkyl ether (2:1) (CAS Reg. No. 431062–72–5).
*
*
*
*
*
Not more than 15% in the formulated product.
Not more than 15% in the formulated product.
*
*
*
*
*
Limits
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:13 May 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
31369
E:\FR\FM\01JNR1.SGM
Uses
*
*
*
*
Surfactant
Surfactant
01JNR1
31370
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 104 / Wednesday, June 1, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–10845 Filed 5–31–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION
46 CFR Part 531
Non-Vessel-Operating Common Carrier
Service Arrangements
Federal Maritime Commission.
Final rule, technical
amendment.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act, this technical
amendment revises 46 CFR part 531.99
and Form FMC–78 to reflect the Office
of Management and Budget’s current
control number.
DATES: Effective June 1, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy W. Larson, General Counsel,
Federal Maritime Commission, 800
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:13 May 31, 2005
Jkt 205001
North Capitol Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20573–0001, (202) 523–5740; Austin
L. Schmitt, Director of Operations,
Federal Maritime Commission, 800 N.
Capitol Street, NW., Washington, DC
20573–0001, (202) 523–0988.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
compliance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, the Federal Maritime
Commission is issuing this technical
revision to 46 CFR 531.99 and Form
FMC–78 to reflect the current Office of
Management and Budget (‘‘OMB’’)
information collection control number
for 46 CFR part 531, reflected in 46 CFR
531.99 and Form FMC–78. The former
OMB control number was 3072–0067,
expiring May 31, 2005. The current
OMB control number is 3072–0070,
expiring March 31, 2008. This technical
rule makes no other changes to the part.
List of Subjects for 46 CFR Part 531
Exports, Non-vessel-operating
common carriers, Ocean transportation
intermediaries.
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Accordingly, 46 CFR part 531 is
revised as follows:
I
PART 531—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 531
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 46 U.S.C. app. § 1715.
2. Revise the last two sentences of
§531.99 to read as follows:
I
§ 531.99 OMB control nuumbers assigned
pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
* * * The valid control number for
this collection of information is 3072–
0070. The valid control number for form
FMC–78 is 3072–0070.
I 3. In Exhibit 1 to 46 CFR Part 531,
NVOCC Service Arrangement
Registration [Form FMC–78], change the
OMB control number and expiration
date to ‘‘3072–0070’’ and ‘‘March 1,
2008.’’ Thus Form FMC–78 will read as
follows:
BILLING CODE 6730–01–P
E:\FR\FM\01JNR1.SGM
01JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 104 (Wednesday, June 1, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31365-31370]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-10845]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP-2005-0115; FRL-7712-1]
Two Isopropylamine Salts of Alkyl C4 and Alkyl
C8- 10 Ethoxyphosphate esters; Exemption from the
Requirement of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes two exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of 2-propanamine, compound with
[alpha]-phosphono- [omega] -butoxypoly (oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) (2:1) and
2-propanamine, compounds with polyethylene glycol dihydrogen phosphate
C8- 10- alkyl ether (2:1), referred to as 2 isopropylamine
salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10
ethoxyphosphate esters, when used as inert ingredients (emulsifier,
solvent and cosolvent) in pesticide formulations applied only to
growing crops. Rhodia, Inc, CN 7500, Cranbury, NJ 08512-7500, submitted
a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA),
requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of these two chemicals.
DATES: This regulation is effective June 1, 2005. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before August 1, 2005.
ADDRESSES: To submit a written objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in Unit XI. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
identification (ID) number OPP-2005-0115. 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 S.
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: Princess Campbell, Registration
Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number: (703) 308-8033; e-mail address:
campbell.princess@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 code 111)
Animal production (NAICS code 112)
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311)
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532)
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.
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 Get Electronic Documents and Other Related Information?
In addition to using EDOCKET at (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/.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of March 17, 1999 (64 FR 13195) (FRL-6065-
5) EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408 of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a, as amended by the FQPA (Public Law 104-170), announcing the
filing of pesticide petitions (PP 8E4990 and 8E4956) by Rhodia Inc, CN
7500, Cranbury, NJ 08512-7500.
The petitions requested that 40 CFR 180.1001(d) newly re-designated
as 40 CFR 180.920 be amended to include exemptions from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of 2-Propanamine, compound with [alpha]-
phosphono- [omega]- butoxypoly (oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) (2:1) (CAS Reg. No.
43140-31-2) and 2-Propanamine, compounds with polyethylene glycol
dihydrogen phosphate C8- 10- alkyl ether (2:1) (CAS Reg. No.
431062-72-5). The 1999 notice included a summary of the petition
prepared by the petitioner requesting, to amend 40 CFR part 180 to
establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for these
two chemicals when used as inert ingredients in pesticide formulations
applied only to growing crops. There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for 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 the 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 the 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
[[Page 31366]]
exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the toxicity of
pesticides. Second, EPA examines exposure to the pesticide through
food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as a
result of pesticide use in residential settings.
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Toxicological Profile
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA, EPA has reviewed
the available scientific data and other relevant information in support
of this action and considered its validity, completeness and
reliability and the relationship of this information 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 these 2 isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl
C8- 10 ethoxyphosphate esters are discussed in this unit.
A. Submitted Studies
The petitioner has also submitted supporting toxicity information
to the Agency which is summarized in Table 1.
The acute toxicity profile is presented in Table 1.
Table 1: Acute Toxicity Profile of 2 isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8 10 ethoxyphosphate esters
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Study Result Category
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute oral (Rats) LD50 > 2,000 mg/kg III
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dermal (Rats) LD50 > 2,000 mg/kg III
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eye irritation Slightly irritating III
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dermal irritation (Rabbits) Not irritating III
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dermal sensitizer (GP) Not a sensitizer NA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioner also submitted the following mutagenicity assays, as
described in Table 2:
Table 2: Mutagenicity Assays Conducted Using:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type of Assay Test Culture Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ames S. typhimurium TA 98, TA 100, TA Negative
102, TA 1535, TA 1537
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Structure Activity Relationship (SAR) Assessment
Toxicity for these 2 isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4
and alkyl C8- 10 ethoxyphosphate esters was assessed, in
part, by a process called structure-activity relationship (SAR). In
this process, the chemical's structural similarity to other chemicals
(for which data are available) is used to determine toxicity. For human
health, this process, can be used to assess absorption and metabolism,
mutagenicity, carcinogenicity, developmental and reproductive effects,
neurotoxicity, systemic effects, immunotoxicity, and sensitization and
irritation. This is a qualitative assessment using terms such as good,
not likely, poor, moderate, or high.
The SAR conclusions for these 2 isopropylamine salts of alkyl
C4 and alkyl C8- 10 ethoxyphosphate esters and
several structurally related analogs were as follows: Absorption would
be poor through the skin, good through the lungs, and moderate through
the GI tract. Absorption of the amine will be good through the lungs
and GI tract based on analogs. The SAR also indicated a concern for
lung toxicity and irritation to mucous membranes if inhaled based on
surfactancy. There is concern for neurotoxicity from the amine salt. No
concerns for developmental or reproductive effects, carcinogenicity, or
mutagenicity were noted. The overall rating for human health is low/
moderate concern.
C. Conclusions
EPA has reviewed the toxicity data for these 2 isopropylamine salts
of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10 ethoxyphosphate
esters and concludes as follows:
The acute toxicity data demonstrated that these 2 isopropylamine
salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10
ethoxyphosphate esters exhibited low acute toxicity, Category III,
based on the Agency's rating of toxicity categories I through IV,
highest to lowest. These 2 isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4
and alkyl C8- 10 ethoxyphosphate esters are slight eye
irritants. Other data reviewed by the Agency indicated that these two
salts are not mutagenic.
The SAR indicated that absorption would be poor through the skin,
good through the lungs, and moderate through the GI tract. The SAR also
[[Page 31367]]
reflected the typical concerns for lung toxicity and irritation to
mucous membranes if inhaled based on surfactancy. Such concerns are
addressed by use of personal protection equipment as determined by end-
product acute inhalation testing, or by limitations on the amount of
surfactant in a formulated pesticide. There are also typical concerns
for neurotoxicity based on the inclusion of an amine salt in the
chemical structure, and for lung toxicity and irritation to mucous
membranes if inhaled based on surfactancy. As a chemical class amine
salts are generally reported to have neurotoxic effects. However, there
is an overall lack of documentation in the public literature to support
a specific concern for neurotoxicity for isopropylamine salts. The SAR
rated these two isopropylamine salts as low to moderate for human
health concerns. This rating reflects the concerns associated with the
irritation to mucous membranes commonly caused by surfactants.
The SAT in OPPT (Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics) has
reviewed information on several surfactants. As a broad class of
chemicals surfactants are often corrosive and irritating to mucous
membranes. These properties make animal toxicity testing of surfactants
difficult, and require interpretation of the test results as to whether
the effects are attributed to the corrosive/irritant effects or other
mechanisms of toxicity.
Based on the SAR assessment, the review and evaluation of the
submitted data, and given the Agency's understanding of the
toxicological properties of surfactants, EPA concludes that these 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10
ethoxyphosphate esters are of lower toxicity. There is a concern for
corrosive/irritation effects of these 2 isopropylamine salts of alkyl
C4 and alkyl C8- 10 ethoxyphosphate esters. Based
on these concerns which are those of surfactants as a class, EPA is
requiring a limitation on the use of these 2 isopropylamine salts of
alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10 ethoxyphosphate esters,
not to exceed 15% in the formulated product. Based on previously
conducted quantitative and qualitative risk assessments on related
surfactant chemicals which the Agency has exempted from the requirement
of a tolerance, the Agency believes that this limitation is
sufficiently protective for the corrosive effects common to the
surfactancy of these two salts.
V. Aggregate Exposures
In examining aggregate exposure, section 408 of the FFDCA directs
EPA to consider available information concerning exposures from the
pesticide residue in food and all other non-occupational exposures,
including drinking water from ground water or surface water and
exposure through pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or buildings
(residential and other indoor uses).
EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the
inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures
that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA
is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be established.
1. Dietary exposure -- Food. In order to assess dietary exposure
the Agency considered that these two isopropylamine salts could be
present in all raw and processed agricultural commodities. The Agency
has estimated a generic dietary exposure estimate for an inert
ingredient of 0.12 milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day). To assure that
the exposure is not underestimated, it is assumed that the inert
ingredients are used on all crops and 100% of all crops are ``treated''
with the inert ingredient. The generic dietary exposure estimate is
based on an application rate of 5 pounds per acre. Information from the
petitioner indicates that the anticipated use rate of these 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10
ethoxyphosphate esters is expected to be much less than one pound per
acre. The expected dietary exposure estimate would therefore be
considerably less than 0.024 mg/kg/day. Given the low levels of
exposure and the low systemic toxicity of these 2 isopropylamine salts
of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10 ethoxyphosphate
esters, the concern for risk to human health is low.
2. Drinking water. Based on its biodegradation models, the Agency
estimated that the time for complete ultimate biodegradation is weeks
to months. There is also strong to very strong sorption to soils and
sediments. Due to the strong adherence to soils and sediments, and
ready biodegradation the substances would only be minimally available
in surface waters. Thus, only low drinking water exposure is expected,
and the concern for risk to human health is low.
VI. Cumulative Effects
Section 408 (b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when considering
whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance or tolerance
exemption, the Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular chemical's residues and ``other
substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
Unlike other pesticide chemicals 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 these 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10
ethoxyphosphate esters and any other substances. These 2 isopropylamine
salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10
ethoxyphosphate esters do not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance
action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that these 2 isopropylamine
salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10
ethoxyphosphate esters have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see the policy statements
released by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs concerning common
mechanism determinations and procedures for cumulating effects from
substances found to have a common mechanism on EPA's website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/.
VII. Safety Factor for the Protection of Infants and Children
FFDCA section 408 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 unless EPA concludes that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. For 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10
ethoxyphosphate esters, the SAR did not identify any concerns for
developmental or reproductive toxicity. The identified concerns for 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10
ethoxyphosphate esters are corrosion/irritation. EPA has not used a
safety factor analysis to assess the risk.
[[Page 31368]]
For the same reasons a tenfold safety factor is unnecessary.
VIII. Determination of Safety for U.S. Population
Based on the information in this preamble, EPA concludes that there
is a reasonable certainty of no harm from aggregate exposure to
residues of 2 isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl
C8- 10 ethoxyphosphate esters, and that under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances aggregate exposure to 2 isopropylamine salts
of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10 ethoxyphosphate
esters will pose no appreciable risk to human health. Accordingly, EPA
finds that exempting 2-Propanamine, compound with [alpha]-phosphono -
[omega]- butoxypoly (oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) (2:1) (CAS Reg. No. 43140-31-
2)and 2-Propanamine, compounds with polyethylene glycol dihydrogen
phosphate C8- 10- alkyl ether (2:1) (CAS Reg. No. 431062-72-
5) from the requirement of a tolerance will be safe for the general
population including infants and children.
IX. Other Considerations
A. Endocrine Disruptors
FQPA requires EPA to develop a screening program to determine
whether certain substances, including all pesticide chemicals (both
inert and active ingredients), ``may have an effect in humans that is
similar to an effect produced by a naturally occurring estrogen, or
such other endocrine effect . . .'' EPA has been working with
interested stakeholders to develop a screening and testing program as
well as a priority setting scheme. As the Agency proceeds with
implementation of this program, further testing of these products, 2
isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl C8- 10
ethoxyphosphate esters, for endocrine effects may be required.
B. Analytical Method(s)
An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation.
C. Existing Exemptions
There are no existing tolerances or tolerance exemptions for these
2 isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl
C8- 10 ethoxyphosphate esters.
D. International Tolerances
The Agency is not aware of any country requiring a tolerance for
these 2 isopropylamine salts of alkyl C4 and alkyl
C8- 10 ethoxyphosphate esters nor have any CODEX Maximum
Residue Levels (MRLs) been established for any food crops at this time.
X. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the requirement for a tolerance is
established for 2-Propanamine, compound with [alpha]-phosphono -
[omega]- butoxypoly (oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) (2:1) (CAS Reg. No. 43140-31-
2) and 2-Propanamine, compounds with polyethylene glycol dihydrogen
phosphate C8- 10- alkyl ether (2:1) (CAS Reg. No. 431062-72-
5).
XI. Objections and Hearing Requests
Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the 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
the FFDCA by the FQPA, EPA will continue to use those procedures, with
appropriate adjustments, until the necessary modifications can be made.
The new section 408(g) of the 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 the FFDCA, as was provided in the old FFDCA sections 408 and 409 of
the 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-2005-0115 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 August 1,
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 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 XI.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-2005-0115, 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 e-mail 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).
[[Page 31369]]
XII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes an exemption from the tolerance
requirement under section 408(d) of the 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 the FFDCA, such as the exemption in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply. In addition, the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' This final rule directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action
does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of 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.
XIII. 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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: May 20, 2005.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. In Sec. 180.920, the table is amended by adding alphabetically the
following inert ingredients to read as follows:
Sec. 180.920 Inert ingredients used pre-harvest; exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inert ingredients Limits Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
2-Propanamine, compound with Not more than 15% Surfactant
[alpha]-phosphono -[omega]- in the formulated
butoxypoly (oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) product.
(2:1) (CAS Reg. No. 43140-31-2).
2-Propanamine, compounds with Not more than 15% Surfactant
polyethylene glycol dihydrogen in the formulated
phosphate C8 10- alkyl ether product.
(2:1) (CAS Reg. No. 431062-72-
5).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 31370]]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-10845 Filed 5-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S