Ethyl Maltol; Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance, 37688-37692 [05-12920]
Download as PDF
37688
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 125 / Thursday, June 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘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.
IX. 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: June 21, 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.
§ 180.532
[Amended]
2. In § 180.532, in the table to
paragraph (a)(2), amend the entries for
‘‘Onion, dry bulb’’; ‘‘Onion, green’’; and
I
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:12 Jun 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
‘‘Strawberry’’ by revising the expiration
date ‘‘12/31/04’’ to read ‘‘12/31/07.’’
[FR Doc. 05–12921 Filed 6–29–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
I. General Information
[OPP–2005–0153; FRL–7717–1]
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
Ethyl Maltol; Exemption from the
Requirement of a Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of 2-ethyl-3hydroxy- 4H-pyran-4-one, also known
as ethyl maltol when used as an inert
ingredient in or on growing crops, when
applied to raw agricultural commodities
after harvest, or to animals. Firmenich
Incorporated 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 ethyl maltol.
DATES: This regulation is effective June
30, 2005. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
August 29, 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–
0153. All documents in the docket are
listed in the EDOCKET index at http:/
/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.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
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:
Sfmt 4700
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.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies
of this Document and Other Related
Information?
In addition to using EDOCKET (http:/
/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 December
20, 2000 (65 FR 79834) (FRL–6751–9),
EPA issued a notice pursuant to section
408(d)(3) of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide tolerance petition (PP 6E4758)
by Firmenich Incorporated, P.O. 5880,
Princeton, NJ 08543. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.1001(c) and
(e), re-designated as 40 CFR 180.910 and
40 CFR 180.930, respectively (69 FR
23113, April 28, 2004 (FRL–7335–4)), be
E:\FR\FM\30JNR1.SGM
30JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 125 / Thursday, June 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
amended by establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of ethyl maltol (CAS Reg. No.
4940–11–8) when used as an inert
ingredient. This notice included a
summary of the petition prepared by the
petitioner, Firmenich Incorporated.
There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
In later correspondence with the
Agency, the petitioner, Firmenich
Incorporated, offered to accept a
limitation for ethyl maltol of not more
than 0.2% of the formulated product.
The tolerance exemption established
today includes that limitation.
Section 408(c)(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(c)(2)(A)(ii) 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. Pursuant to
section 408(c)(2)(B), in establishing or
maintaining in effect an exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance, EPA
must take into account the factors set
forth in section 408(b)(2)(C), which
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. 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.
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.
TOXICITY DATA FOR ETHYL MALTOL—
Continued
IV. Toxicological Profile
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 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
ethyl maltol are discussed in this unit.
A. Toxicity Data
The following table summarizes the
toxicological aspects of ethyl maltol.
Even though the studies which yielded
the data were not conducted in
accordance with the Agency guidelines,
and lacked some experimental details,
the studies appear to be well conducted.
Thus, the results of these studies can be
used for regulatory purposes. In
addition to using the toxicity data, the
Agency also conducted a Structure
Activity Relationship (SAR) analysis for
ethyl maltol. This analysis supports the
conclusions suggested by the toxicity
data, namely, that ethyl maltol poses a
low concern for adverse effects on
human health.
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
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:12 Jun 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
37689
PO 00000
TOXICITY DATA FOR ETHYL MALTOL
Study
Study
Result
90–Day subchronic
oral toxicity (dogs)
Dose = 0, 125, 250,
or 500 mg/kg/day
NOAEL ≥ 500 mg/
kg/day (highest
dose tested
(HDT))
LOAEL = not observed but would
be > 500 mg/kg/
day
2–year chronic oral
toxicity (rats)
Dose= 0, 50, 100, or
200 mg/kg/day
NOAEL ≥ 200 mg/
kg/day
LOAEL = not observed but would
be > 200 mg/kg/
day
2–year chronic toxicity (dogs)
Dose= 0, 50, 100, or
200 mg/kg/day
NOAEL ≥ 200 mg/
kg/day
LOAEL = not observed but would
be > 200 mg/kg/
day
Reproduction and
fertility effects
Parental/Systemic
NOAEL ≥ 200 mg/
kg/day
Parental/Systemic
LOAEL = not observed but would
be > 200 mg/kg/
day
No significant treatment related effects on fertility,
gestation, parturition, lactation, or
fetal development.
Carcinogenicity rats
no evidence of carcinogenicity
Carcinogenicity mice
no evidence of carcinogenicity
Gene Mutation Ames (5 strains of
S. typhimurium)
non-mutagenic
Gene MutationDrosophila
no increase in sex
linked recessive
lethal mutations
Gene Mutationmouse micronucleus
no increase in
polynucleated
cells
Metabolism and
pharmacokinetics
64% of the 10 mg/
kg total dose excreted within 24
hours
Result
Acute oral toxicity
mice (male)
Dose= 5%
Lethal Dose (LD) 50
= 780 milligram/
kilogram/day (mg/
kg/day)
Acute oral toxicity
rats (male)
Dose = 10%
LD 50 = 1,150 mg/
kg/day
Acute oral toxicity
rats (female)
Dose = 10%
LD 50 = 1,200 mg/
kg/day
B. Structure Activity Relationship
90–Day subchronic
oral toxicity (rats)
Dose = 0, 250, 500,
or 1,000 mg/kg/
day
NOAEL = 250 mg/
kg/day
LOAEL = 500 mg/
kg/day
Toxicity for ethyl maltol was
assessed, in part, by a process called
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
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30JNR1.SGM
30JNR1
37690
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 125 / Thursday, June 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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.
Ethyl maltol is not absorbed from the
skin if it is not in solution, and
moderately absorbed from the skin if it
is in solution based on physio-chemical
properties (pchem). It is absorbed from
the lung and GI tract based on data from
surrogate chemicals. There is an
uncertain concern for mutagenicity.
Overall, health concern is rated as low.
C. Regulatory Characterizations of
Toxicity by Other Governmental
Organizations
The Food and Drug Administration
has classified ethyl maltol as GRAS
(generally recognized as safe) for use as
a direct food additive as a flavoring
agent (21 CFR 172.515-Synthetic
Flavoring Substances and Adjuvants). In
1970, the Joint Food and Agricultural
Organization of the United Nations/
World Health Organization (FAO/WHO)
Expert Committee on Food Additives
established a group ADI (Acceptable
Daily Intake) of 0-2mg/kg-bodyweight
(bw) for ethyl maltol (https://
www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/
jecmono/v048aje01.htm)
D. Conclusions
Ethyl maltol is a member of a class of
chemicals known as flavor enhancers. It
is almost completely absorbed from the
gut and appears in the urine as
gluconamide or sulfate within two
hours. The toxicity data in the previous
Table was used to assess the toxicity of
ethyl maltol. The acute oral LD50 values
which ranged from 780 mg/kg and 1,270
mg/kg place ethyl maltol in Toxicity
Category III. EPA categorizes acute
toxicity as I, II, III, or IV, with Category
IV being the Agency’s lowest level of
acute toxicity. Also, there were no
effects observed on the skin of rabbits
when ethyl maltol was used at a dose of
5,000 mg/kg.
The report from the structure activity
team (SAT) cites an uncertain concern
for mutagenicity. This uncertainty was
based on positive dose-related activity
against only one Salmonella strain (TA
100), but the mutagenic effects were not
reproducible. Given the lack of
reproducibility, ethyl maltol was
classified as non-mutagenic in the Ames
test.
The SAR assessment did not indicate
any concerns for carcinogenicity,
developmental or reproductive
concerns. The available repeated dose
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:12 Jun 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
toxicity studies have NOAELs that are
equal to or greater than 200 mg/kg/day.
V. Aggregate Exposures
In examining aggregate exposure,
FFDCA section 408 directs EPA to
consider available information
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).
A. Dietary Exposure
1. Food. Ethyl maltol has been used in
foodstuffs as a flavoring agent since the
1950’s. Ethyl maltol is estimated to have
a per capita daily intake of 0.0045 mg/
kg from use as a food additive (https://
www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/
jecmono/v048aje01.htm). Using a 60 kg
person the daily intake becomes 0.27
mg/day, based on ethyl maltol’s use as
a food additive. The use of ethyl maltol
as an inert ingredient in a pesticide
product, especially considering the
limitation of no more than 0.2% of the
formulated product, should not
significantly increase this estimate.
2. Drinking water exposure. The SAT
report states that migration of ethyl
maltol to ground water is moderate to
rapid. Ethyl maltol has an estimated
water solubility of 1.5 to 24 grams/Liter
(g/L), a volatilization half-life of 81
hours in rivers and 41 days in lakes, and
biodegrades rapidly. Based on
biodegradation models and on the
SAT’s professional judgement, ethyl
maltol undergoes primary (partial)
aerobic biodegradation in days to weeks,
and is completely biodegraded in
weeks. The biodegradability estimate
and Henry’s Law Constant suggest that
the residence time of ethyl maltol in
surface waters is controlled by the
biodegradation rate and not the rate of
volatilization. Ethyl maltol has the
potential to be mobile in soil, but if
released to aerobic soils its migration
would be mitigated by biodegradation. If
it enters anaerobic soils (as in a landfill
leachate scenario) biodegradation would
be expected to be somewhat slower but
still relatively rapid. Therefore,
significant concentrations of ethyl
maltol are very unlikely in sources of
drinking water.
B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure
Ethyl maltol is used as a flavor
enhancer for cigarettes, antiseptics, and
perfumes. Because use as a flavoring
substance generally constitutes such a
low percentage of the formulation
exposure is likely to be minimal.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
VI. Cumulative Effects
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the 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 the
above chemical substances and any
other substances. Ethyl maltol 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 this
chemical substance has 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 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 ethyl maltol, based on the
expected minimal oral toxicity, as
demonstrated by toxicity studies with
NOAELs greater than 200 mg/kg/day,
the available toxicity data which
indicates no significant treatment
related effects on fertility, gestation,
parturition, lactation, or fetal
development, EPA has not used a safety
factor analysis to assess the risk. For the
same reasons a tenfold safety factor is
unnecessary.
VIII. Determination of Safety for U.S.
Population
Based on its review and evaluation of
the available data on toxicity and
exposure, and considering the 0.2%
limitation in the formulation offered by
the petitioner, EPA finds that exempting
ethyl maltol (CAS Reg. No. 4940–11–8)
E:\FR\FM\30JNR1.SGM
30JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 125 / Thursday, June 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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 products containing
ethyl maltol for endocrine effects may
be required.
B. Analytical Method
An analytical method is not required
for tolerance enforcement purposes
since the Agency is establishing an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance.
C. Existing Tolerances
There are no existing tolerance
exemptions for ethyl maltol.
D. International Tolerances
The Agency is not aware of any
country requiring a tolerance for ethyl
maltol nor have any CODEX Maximum
Residue Levels (MRLs) been established
for any food crops at this time.
X. Conclusions
Therefore, EPA is establishing a
tolerance exemption for ethyl maltol
(CAS Reg. No. 4940–11–8) with a
limitation in the pesticide formulation
of not more than 0.2%.
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 of 1996, EPA will
continue to use those procedures, with
appropriate adjustments, until the
necessary modifications can be made.
The new section 408(g) 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
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:12 Jun 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
section 408(d), as was provided in the
old FFDCA sections 408 and 409.
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–2005–0153 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 29, 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–2005–0153, 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. In person or by
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
37691
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: oppdocket@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).
XII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes an
exemption from the tolerance
requirement under FFDCA section
408(d) 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,
E:\FR\FM\30JNR1.SGM
30JNR1
37692
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 125 / Thursday, June 30, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
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 FFDCA section 408(d), 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 FFDCA section 408(n)(4).
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
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:12 Jun 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
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
Inert ingredients
Limits
*
*
*
*
Ethyl maltol (CAS Reg.
No.4940–11–8)
*
*
*
*
Uses
*
*
*
Not more Odor
than
mask0.2 %
ing
of the
agent
pesticide
formulation
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
3. In § 180.930 the table is amended by
adding alphabetically the following inert
ingredient to read as follows:
I
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).
§ 180.930 Inert ingredients applied to
animals; exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: June 20, 2005.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
* * *
Inert ingredients
Limits
*
*
*
*
Ethyl maltol (CAS Reg.
No.4940–11–8)
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Uses
*
*
*
Not more Odor
than
mask0.2 %
ing
of the
agent
pesticide
formulation
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–12920 Filed 6–29–05; 8:45 am]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP–2005–0143; FRL–7722–3]
Extension of Tolerances for
Emergency Exemptions (Multiple
Chemicals)
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation extends timelimited tolerances for the pesticides
listed in Unit II. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
I 1. The authority citation for part 180
INFORMATION. These actions are in
continues to read as follows:
response to EPA’s granting of emergency
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
exemptions under section 18 of the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
I 2. In § 180.910 the table is amended by
adding alphabetically the following inert Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) authorizing
use of these pesticides. Section 408(l)(6)
ingredient to read as follows:
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
§ 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and
Act (FFDCA) requires EPA to establish
PART 180—[AMENDED]
post-harvest; exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance.
PO 00000
* * *
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30JNR1.SGM
30JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 125 (Thursday, June 30, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37688-37692]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-12920]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP-2005-0153; FRL-7717-1]
Ethyl Maltol; Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of 2-ethyl-3-hydroxy- 4H-pyran-4-one, also
known as ethyl maltol when used as an inert ingredient in or on growing
crops, when applied to raw agricultural commodities after harvest, or
to animals. Firmenich Incorporated 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 ethyl
maltol.
DATES: This regulation is effective June 30, 2005. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before August 29, 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-2005-0153. 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.
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/.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of December 20, 2000 (65 FR 79834) (FRL-
6751-9), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of the
FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide
tolerance petition (PP 6E4758) by Firmenich Incorporated, P.O. 5880,
Princeton, NJ 08543. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.1001(c) and
(e), re-designated as 40 CFR 180.910 and 40 CFR 180.930, respectively
(69 FR 23113, April 28, 2004 (FRL-7335-4)), be
[[Page 37689]]
amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of ethyl maltol (CAS Reg. No. 4940-11-8) when
used as an inert ingredient. This notice included a summary of the
petition prepared by the petitioner, Firmenich Incorporated. There were
no comments received in response to the notice of filing.
In later correspondence with the Agency, the petitioner, Firmenich
Incorporated, offered to accept a limitation for ethyl maltol of not
more than 0.2% of the formulated product. The tolerance exemption
established today includes that limitation.
Section 408(c)(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(c)(2)(A)(ii) 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. Pursuant to section 408(c)(2)(B), in
establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the factors set forth in
section 408(b)(2)(C), which 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. 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 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 ethyl
maltol are discussed in this unit.
A. Toxicity Data
The following table summarizes the toxicological aspects of ethyl
maltol. Even though the studies which yielded the data were not
conducted in accordance with the Agency guidelines, and lacked some
experimental details, the studies appear to be well conducted. Thus,
the results of these studies can be used for regulatory purposes. In
addition to using the toxicity data, the Agency also conducted a
Structure Activity Relationship (SAR) analysis for ethyl maltol. This
analysis supports the conclusions suggested by the toxicity data,
namely, that ethyl maltol poses a low concern for adverse effects on
human health.
Toxicity Data for Ethyl Maltol
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Study Result
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute oral toxicity mice (male) Lethal Dose (LD) 50 = 780
Dose= 5%.................................. milligram/kilogram/day (mg/
kg/day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute oral toxicity rats (male) LD 50 = 1,150 mg/kg/day
Dose = 10%................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute oral toxicity rats (female) LD 50 = 1,200 mg/kg/day
Dose = 10%................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
90-Day subchronic oral toxicity (rats) NOAEL = 250 mg/kg/day
Dose = 0, 250, 500, or 1,000 mg/kg/day.... LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
90-Day subchronic oral toxicity (dogs) NOAEL >= 500 mg/kg/day
Dose = 0, 125, 250, or 500 mg/kg/day...... (highest dose tested (HDT))
LOAEL = not observed but
would be > 500 mg/kg/day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2-year chronic oral toxicity (rats) NOAEL >= 200 mg/kg/day
Dose= 0, 50, 100, or 200 mg/kg/day........ LOAEL = not observed but
would be > 200 mg/kg/day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2-year chronic toxicity (dogs) NOAEL >= 200 mg/kg/day
Dose= 0, 50, 100, or 200 mg/kg/day........ LOAEL = not observed but
would be > 200 mg/kg/day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reproduction and fertility effects Parental/Systemic NOAEL >=
200 mg/kg/day
Parental/Systemic LOAEL =
not observed but would be >
200 mg/kg/day
No significant treatment
related effects on
fertility, gestation,
parturition, lactation, or
fetal development.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carcinogenicity rats no evidence of
carcinogenicity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carcinogenicity mice no evidence of
carcinogenicity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gene Mutation - Ames (5 strains of S. non-mutagenic
typhimurium)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gene Mutation- Drosophila no increase in sex linked
recessive lethal mutations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gene Mutation- mouse micronucleus no increase in polynucleated
cells
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metabolism and pharmacokinetics 64% of the 10 mg/kg total
dose excreted within 24
hours
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Structure Activity Relationship
Toxicity for ethyl maltol was assessed, in part, by a process
called 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
[[Page 37690]]
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.
Ethyl maltol is not absorbed from the skin if it is not in
solution, and moderately absorbed from the skin if it is in solution
based on physio-chemical properties (pchem). It is absorbed from the
lung and GI tract based on data from surrogate chemicals. There is an
uncertain concern for mutagenicity. Overall, health concern is rated as
low.
C. Regulatory Characterizations of Toxicity by Other Governmental
Organizations
The Food and Drug Administration has classified ethyl maltol as
GRAS (generally recognized as safe) for use as a direct food additive
as a flavoring agent (21 CFR 172.515-Synthetic Flavoring Substances and
Adjuvants). In 1970, the Joint Food and Agricultural Organization of
the United Nations/World Health Organization (FAO/WHO) Expert Committee
on Food Additives established a group ADI (Acceptable Daily Intake) of
0-2mg/kg-bodyweight (bw) for ethyl maltol (https://www.inchem.org/
documents/jecfa/jecmono/v048aje01.htm)
D. Conclusions
Ethyl maltol is a member of a class of chemicals known as flavor
enhancers. It is almost completely absorbed from the gut and appears in
the urine as gluconamide or sulfate within two hours. The toxicity data
in the previous Table was used to assess the toxicity of ethyl maltol.
The acute oral LD50 values which ranged from 780 mg/kg and
1,270 mg/kg place ethyl maltol in Toxicity Category III. EPA
categorizes acute toxicity as I, II, III, or IV, with Category IV being
the Agency's lowest level of acute toxicity. Also, there were no
effects observed on the skin of rabbits when ethyl maltol was used at a
dose of 5,000 mg/kg.
The report from the structure activity team (SAT) cites an
uncertain concern for mutagenicity. This uncertainty was based on
positive dose-related activity against only one Salmonella strain (TA
100), but the mutagenic effects were not reproducible. Given the lack
of reproducibility, ethyl maltol was classified as non-mutagenic in the
Ames test.
The SAR assessment did not indicate any concerns for
carcinogenicity, developmental or reproductive concerns. The available
repeated dose toxicity studies have NOAELs that are equal to or greater
than 200 mg/kg/day.
V. Aggregate Exposures
In examining aggregate exposure, FFDCA section 408 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).
A. Dietary Exposure
1. Food. Ethyl maltol has been used in foodstuffs as a flavoring
agent since the 1950's. Ethyl maltol is estimated to have a per capita
daily intake of 0.0045 mg/kg from use as a food additive (https://
www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/jecmono/v048aje01.htm). Using a 60 kg
person the daily intake becomes 0.27 mg/day, based on ethyl maltol's
use as a food additive. The use of ethyl maltol as an inert ingredient
in a pesticide product, especially considering the limitation of no
more than 0.2% of the formulated product, should not significantly
increase this estimate.
2. Drinking water exposure. The SAT report states that migration of
ethyl maltol to ground water is moderate to rapid. Ethyl maltol has an
estimated water solubility of 1.5 to 24 grams/Liter (g/L), a
volatilization half-life of 81 hours in rivers and 41 days in lakes,
and biodegrades rapidly. Based on biodegradation models and on the
SAT's professional judgement, ethyl maltol undergoes primary (partial)
aerobic biodegradation in days to weeks, and is completely biodegraded
in weeks. The biodegradability estimate and Henry's Law Constant
suggest that the residence time of ethyl maltol in surface waters is
controlled by the biodegradation rate and not the rate of
volatilization. Ethyl maltol has the potential to be mobile in soil,
but if released to aerobic soils its migration would be mitigated by
biodegradation. If it enters anaerobic soils (as in a landfill leachate
scenario) biodegradation would be expected to be somewhat slower but
still relatively rapid. Therefore, significant concentrations of ethyl
maltol are very unlikely in sources of drinking water.
B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure
Ethyl maltol is used as a flavor enhancer for cigarettes,
antiseptics, and perfumes. Because use as a flavoring substance
generally constitutes such a low percentage of the formulation exposure
is likely to be minimal.
VI. Cumulative Effects
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the 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 the above chemical
substances and any other substances. Ethyl maltol 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
this chemical substance has 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 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 ethyl
maltol, based on the expected minimal oral toxicity, as demonstrated by
toxicity studies with NOAELs greater than 200 mg/kg/day, the available
toxicity data which indicates no significant treatment related effects
on fertility, gestation, parturition, lactation, or fetal development,
EPA has not used a safety factor analysis to assess the risk. For the
same reasons a tenfold safety factor is unnecessary.
VIII. Determination of Safety for U.S. Population
Based on its review and evaluation of the available data on
toxicity and exposure, and considering the 0.2% limitation in the
formulation offered by the petitioner, EPA finds that exempting ethyl
maltol (CAS Reg. No. 4940-11-8)
[[Page 37691]]
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 products containing ethyl maltol for
endocrine effects may be required.
B. Analytical Method
An analytical method is not required for tolerance enforcement
purposes since the Agency is establishing an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance.
C. Existing Tolerances
There are no existing tolerance exemptions for ethyl maltol.
D. International Tolerances
The Agency is not aware of any country requiring a tolerance for
ethyl maltol nor have any CODEX Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) been
established for any food crops at this time.
X. Conclusions
Therefore, EPA is establishing a tolerance exemption for ethyl
maltol (CAS Reg. No. 4940-11-8) with a limitation in the pesticide
formulation of not more than 0.2%.
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 of 1996, EPA will continue to use those
procedures, with appropriate adjustments, until the necessary
modifications can be made. The new section 408(g) 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), as was provided in the old FFDCA sections 408 and 409.
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-2005-0153 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
29, 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-2005-0153, 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.
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).
XII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes an exemption from the tolerance
requirement under FFDCA section 408(d) 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,
[[Page 37692]]
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 FFDCA section 408(d), 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 FFDCA section 408(n)(4). 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: June 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. 180.910 the table is amended by adding alphabetically the
following inert ingredient to read as follows:
Sec. 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance.
* * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inert ingredients Limits Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Ethyl maltol (CAS Reg. No.4940- Not more than 0.2 Odor masking agent
11-8) % of the
pesticide
formulation
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 180.930 the table is amended by adding alphabetically the
following inert ingredient to read as follows:
Sec. 180.930 Inert ingredients applied to animals; exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance.
* * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inert ingredients Limits Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Ethyl maltol (CAS Reg. No.4940- Not more than 0.2 Odor masking agent
11-8) % of the
pesticide
formulation
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-12920 Filed 6-29-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S