Fenpropimorph; Pesticide Tolerance, 15608-15612 [06-3029]
Download as PDF
15608
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
I 1. The authority citation for part 180
available either electronically in
continues to read as follows:
EDOCKET or in hard copy at the Public
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
Information and Records Integrity
Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall
I 2. Section 180.613 is amended by
#2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. This
alphabetically adding commodities to
docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to
the table in paragraph (a)(1) to read as
4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
follows:
excluding legal holidays. The docket
telephone number is (703) 305–5805.
§ 180.613 Flonicamid; tolerances for
residues.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lana Coppolino, Registration Division
(a) General. (1) * * *
(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Parts per
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Commodity
million
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A ...............................
1.5 (703) 305–0086; e-mail address:
coppolino.lana@epa.gov.
*
*
*
*
*
Mustard greens .........................
11 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PART 180—AMENDED
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
I. General Information
*
[FR Doc. 06–2977 Filed 3–28–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–0105; FRL–7761–3]
Fenpropimorph; Pesticide Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a
tolerance for residues of fenpropimorph
in or on bananas. BASF Corporation
Agricultural Products requested this
tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended
by the Food Quality Protection Act
(FQPA) of 1996.
DATES: This regulation is effective
March 29, 2006. Objections and requests
for hearings must be received on or
before May 30, 2006.
ADDRESSES: To submit a written
objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in
Unit VI. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2005–0105. 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Mar 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to:
• Crop production (NAICS 111), e.g.,
agricultural workers; greenhouse,
nursery, and floriculture workers;
farmers.
• Animal production (NAICS 112),
e.g., cattle ranchers and farmers, dairy
cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
• Food manufacturing (NAICS 311),
e.g., agricultural workers; farmers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture
workers; ranchers; pesticide applicators.
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
32532), e.g., agricultural workers;
commercial applicators; farmers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture
workers; residential users.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. A
frequently updated electronic version of
40 CFR part 180 is available at E-CFR
Beta Site Two at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/. To access the
OPPTS Harmonized Guidelines
referenced in this document, go directly
to the guidelines at https://www.epa.gpo/
opptsfrs/home/guidelin.htm/.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of June 22,
2005 (70 FR 36155)(FRL–7710–1), EPA
issued a notice pursuant to section
408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 7E4874) by BASF
Corporation Agricultural Products, 26
Davis Drive, P.O. Box 13528; Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.616 be
amended by establishing a tolerance for
residues of the fungicide
fenpropimorph, (+)-cis-4-(3-((4-tertbutylphenyl))-2-methylpropyl)-2,6dimethylmorpholine, in or on bananas
at 1.5 parts per million (ppm). This
petition was previously published in the
Federal Register on December 7, 1998,
identified by the docket control number
PF-848. That notice included a
summary of the petition prepared by
BASF Corporation Agricultural
Products, the registrant. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. . . .’’
EPA performs a number of analyses to
determine the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide residues. For
further discussion of the regulatory
requirements of section 408 of the
FFDCA and a complete description of
the risk assessment process, see https://
E:\FR\FM\29MRR1.SGM
29MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/
November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other
relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess
the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure,
consistent with section 408(b)(2) of
FFDCA, for a tolerance for residues of
fenpropimorph on bananas at 2.0 ppm.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with establishing the
tolerance follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children. Specific
information on the studies received and
the nature of the toxic effects caused by
fenpropimorph as well as the noobserved-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL)
and the lowest-observed-adverse-effectlevel (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
opprd001/factsheets/.
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold
below which there is no appreciable
risk, the dose at which no adverse
effects are observed (the NOAEL) from
the toxicology study identified as
appropriate for use in risk assessment is
used to estimate the toxicological level
of concern (LOC). However, the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL) is sometimes
used for risk assessment if no NOAEL
15609
was achieved in the toxicology study
selected. An uncertainty factor (UF) is
applied to reflect uncertainties inherent
in the extrapolation from laboratory
animal data to humans and in the
variations in sensitivity among members
of the human population as well as
other unknowns.
The linear default risk methodology
(Q*) is the primary method currently
used by the Agency to quantify nonthreshold hazards such as cancer. The
Q* approach assumes that any amount
of exposure will lead to some degree of
cancer risk, estimates risk in terms of
the probability of occurrence of
additional cancer cases. More
information can be found on the general
principles EPA uses in risk
characterization at https://www.epa.gov/
oppfead1/trac/science.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for fenpropimorph used for
human risk assessment is shown in the
following Table 1:
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSE AND ENDPOINTS FOR FENPROPIMORPH FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK
ASSESSMENT
Dose Used in Risk Assessment,
Interspecies and Intraspecies and
any Traditional UF
Exposure/Scenario
Special FQPA SF and Level of Concern for Risk Assessment
Study and Toxicological Effects
Acute dietary (females
13-49 years of age)
NOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
UF = 100X
Acute RfD = 0.15 mg/kg/day
Special FQPA SF = 1X
aPAD = acute RfD/Special FQPA SF
= 0.15 mg/kg/day
Rabbit developmental study
LOAEL = 30 mg/kg/day based on
cleft palate
Chronic dietary (all
populations)
NOAEL = 3.2 mg/kg/day
UF = 100X
Chronic RfD = 0.032 mg/kg/day
Special FQPA SF = 1X
cPAD = chronic RfD/Special FQPA
SF = 0.032 mg/kg/day
One year dog and chronic/carcinogenicity rat studies
LOAEL = 9-11 mg/kg/day based on
liver histopathology
Cancer (oral, dermal,
inhalation)
Classification: ‘‘Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.’’ No increased incidences in tumors in a chronic/carcinogenicity rat study or a carcinogenicity mouse study.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. This final rule establishes the
first tolerance for residues of
fenpropimorph. There are no registered
uses in the United States, therefore, the
only expected exposure is from
imported foods. Risk assessments were
conducted by EPA to assess dietary
exposures from fenpropimorph in food
as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide,
if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1–day or single
exposure.
The Dietary Exposure Evaluation
Model (DEEMTM-FDIC) Version 2.03
analysis evaluated the individual food
consumption as reported by
respondents in the U.S Department of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Mar 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
Agriculture (USDA), 1994–1996, and
1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of
Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII) and
accumulated exposure to the chemical
for each commodity. The following
assumptions were made for the acute
exposure assessments: The DEEMTMFCID assessment was based on
tolerance-level residues in banana
commodities, a processing factor of 3.9
for dried banana commodities, and
100% crop treated (CT) assumptions.
An acute dietary dose and an endpoint
attributable to a single dose were
identified for only one population
subgroup, females ages 13 through 49.
An appropriate endpoint attributable to
a single exposure was not identified for
the general population.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the DEEM software with the
FCID, Version 2.03, which incorporates
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
food consumption data as reported by
respondents in the USDA 1994–1996,
and 1998 Nationwide CSFII, and
accumulated exposure to the chemical
for each commodity. The following
assumptions were made for the chronic
exposure assessments: The DEEM-FCID
assessment was based on tolerance-level
residues in banana commodities, a
processing factor of 3.9 for dried banana
commodities, and 100% CT
assumptions.
iii. Cancer. The Agency classified
fenpropimorph as ‘‘not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans.’’ There were no
increased incidences of benign or
malignant tumors in either a rat
chronic/carcinogenicity or a mouse
carcinogenicity study. Therefore, a
quantitative cancer exposure assessment
was unnecessary.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. There is no expectation that
E:\FR\FM\29MRR1.SGM
29MRR1
15610
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with RULES
fenpropimorph residues would occur in
surface water or ground water sources of
drinking water. Fenpropimorph is
proposed for use only on imported
bananas, the sole anticipated exposure
route for the U.S population is via
dietary (food) exposure. There are no
registered uses of fenpropimorph in the
United States.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
Fenpropimorph is not registered for use
on any sites that would result in
residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
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
fenpropimorph and any other
substances and fenpropimorph 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
fenpropimorph 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/.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA
provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold margin of safety for
infants and children in the case of
threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the data base on
toxicity and exposure unless EPA
determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Mar 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
infants and children. Margins of safety
are incorporated into EPA risk
assessments either directly through use
of a margin of exposure analysis or
through using uncertainty (safety)
factors in calculating a dose level that
poses no appreciable risk to humans. In
applying this provision, EPA either
retains the default value of 10X when
reliable data do not support the choice
of a different factor, or, if reliable data
are available, EPA uses a different
additional safety factor value based on
the use of traditional UFs and/or special
FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
Although there is evidence for increased
qualitative susceptibility in the
developmental rat and rabbit studies,
the Agency concluded that there is a
low degree of concern (and no residual
uncertainty) because:
i. The increased susceptibility was
seen at the LOAELs of 160 milligrams/
kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) in the rat
study and at 30 mg/kg/day in the rabbit
study (NOAELs were 40 and 15 mg/kg/
day for the rat and rabbit studies,
respectively);
ii. Cleft palate was not reported in a
second rabbit developmental study with
doses up to 36 mg/kg/day;
iii. No mention was made of cleft
palate in another developmental rat
study at doses up to 160 mg/kg/day
(however, there were no visceral or
skeletal examinations of fetuses/pups);
iv. At doses up to 2.79 mg/kg/day in
a 2-generation reproduction study in
rats, cleft palate was not reported;
v. Developmental effects were
observed only in the presence of
maternal toxicity; and
vi. The doses selected for acute and
chronic dietary exposure and risk
assessment were considerably lower
than the doses at which developmental
effects were observed.
3. Conclusion. Based on the review of
the toxicology database, the Agency
recommends that the Special FQPA
Safety Factor (10X) be removed
(reduced to 1X). This recommendation
is applicable to all population
subgroups for all exposure routes and
durations, and is based on the following
factors:
i. There is a complete toxicity data
base.
ii.There is a low degree of concern for
the qualitative susceptibility in
developmental rat and rabbit studies,
because the fetal effects were observed
only in the presence of maternal
toxicity.
iii. There is no concern for prenatal/
postnatal toxicity since no off-spring
toxicity was seen in the 2 generation
reproduction study.
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
iv. The endpoints of concern are
addressed in this risk assessment.
v. The dietary exposure assessment
assumed tolerance level residues and
100% CT.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food to fenpropimorph
will occupy 2.6% of the acute
population adjusted dose (aPAD) for
females ages 13 through 49. An
appropriate endpoint attributable to a
single exposure was not identified for
the general population nor any of the
other population subgroup. Aggregate
risk is limited to dietary exposure (food
only). EPA does not expect the aggregate
exposure to exceed 100% of the aPAD.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that exposure to fenpropimorph from
food will utilize 2.2% of the cPAD for
the U.S. population, 9.1% of the cPAD
for all infants <1 year, and 11% of the
cPAD for children 1-2 years, the
population subgroup having the higest
exposure.Aggregate risk is limited to
dietary exposure (food only). EPA does
not expect the aggregate exposure to
exceed 100% of the cPAD.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Fenpropimorph is not registered for
use on any sites that would result in
residential exposure, and there is no
expectation that fenpropimorph
residues would occur via drinking water
consumption. Therefore, the aggregate
risk is the sum of the risk from food
only, which does not exceed the
Agency’s level of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account residential exposure
plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
Fenpropimorph is not registered for
use on any sites that would result in
residential exposure, and there is no
expectation that fenpropimorph
residues would occur via drinking water
consumption. Therefore, the aggregate
risk is the sum of the risk from food
only, which does not exceed the
Agency’s level of concern.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Fenpropimorph has not
been shown to be carcinogenic.
Therefore, fenpropimorph is not
expected to pose a cancer risk.
E:\FR\FM\29MRR1.SGM
29MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, and to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to
fenpropimorph residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
The proposed method is adequate for
collecting data on residues in bananas.
Adequate method validation data were
submitted. The method has been
adequately radiovalidated, and has
undergone a marginally successful
independent laboratory validation (ILV)
trial. The petitioner has been requested
to submit acceptable recovery data from
bananas using other suggested methods.
The method, gas chromatography
with nitrogen-phosphorous detection
(GC/NPD), is available to enforce the
tolerance expression. The method may
be requested from: Chief, Analytical
Chemistry Branch, Environmental
Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft.
Meade, MD 20755–5350; telephone
number: (410) 305–2905; e-mail address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
There are no established Mexican or
Canadian maximum residue limits
(MRLs) for fenpropimorph residues.
There are Codex MRLs established for
fenpropimorph residues in various
commodities, including an MRL of 2
mg/kg in bananas.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, the tolerance is established
for residues of fenpropimorph, [rel(2R,6S)-4-[3-[4-(1,1dimethylethyl)phenyl]-2-methylpropyl]2,6-dimethylmorpholine], in or on
banana at 2.0 ppm with no U.S.
registration.
VI. Objections and Hearing Requests
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, as
amended by FQPA, any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this
regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. The EPA
procedural regulations which govern the
submission of objections and requests
for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178.
Although the procedures in those
regulations require some modification to
reflect the amendments made to FFDCA
by FQPA, EPA will continue to use
those procedures, with appropriate
adjustments, until the necessary
modifications can be made. The new
section 408(g) of FFDCA provides
essentially the same process for persons
to ‘‘object’’ to a regulation for an
exemption from the requirement of a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Mar 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
tolerance issued by EPA under new
section 408(d) of FFDCA, as was
provided in the old sections 408 and
409 of FFDCA. However, the period for
filing objections is now 60 days, rather
than 30 days.
A. What Do I Need to Do to File an
Objection or Request a Hearing?
You must file your objection or
request a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions
provided in this unit and in 40 CFR part
178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,
you must identify docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–0105 in the subject
line on the first page of your
submission. All requests must be in
writing, and must be mailed or
delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or
before March 30, 2006.
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 issue(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.
2. 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.
3. Copies for the Docket. In addition
to filing an objection or hearing request
with the Hearing Clerk as described in
Unit VI.A., you should also send a copy
of your request to the PIRIB for its
inclusion in the official record that is
described in ADDRESSES. Mail your
copies, identified by docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–0105, to: Public
Information and Records Integrity
Branch, Information Technology and
Resource Management Division (7502C),
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
15611
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
issue(s) in the manner sought by the
requestor would be adequate to justify
the action requested (40 CFR 178.32).
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes a tolerance
under section 408(d) of FFDCA in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory
Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this rule has
been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of
significance, this rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This final rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any
enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public
Law 104–4). Nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive
Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16,
E:\FR\FM\29MRR1.SGM
29MRR1
15612
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
1994); or OMB review or any Agency
action under Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since
tolerances and exemptions that are
established on the basis of a petition
under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply. In addition, the
Agency has determined that this action
will not have a substantial direct effect
on States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Executive Order 13132 requires
EPA to develop an accountable process
to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies
that have federalism implications’’ is
defined in the Executive Order to
include regulations that have
‘‘substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’ This final rule
directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers and food
retailers, not States. This action does not
alter the relationships or distribution of
power and responsibilities established
by Congress in the preemption
provisions of section 408(n)(4) of
FFDCA. For these same reasons, the
Agency has determined that this rule
does not have any ‘‘tribal implications’’
as described in Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 6, 2000). Executive
Order 13175, requires EPA to develop
an accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal
officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’‘‘Policies that have tribal
implications’’ is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and the Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.’’ This
rule will not have substantial direct
effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
VIII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of this final
rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: March 20, 2006.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.616 is added to read as
follows:
I
§ 180.616 Fenpropimorph; tolerances for
residues.
Tolerances are established for the
residues of the fungicide fenpropimorph
(rel-(2R,6S)-4-[3-[4-(1,1dimethylethyl)phenyl]-2-methylpropyl]2,6-dimethylmorpholine) in or on the
following commodity:
Commodity
Parts per million
Banana* ...............................................................................................................................................................................
2.0
*No U.S. registration as of February 10, 2006.
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues.
[Reserved]
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2004–0328; FRL–7769–6]
DATES:
Fenhexamid; Pesticide Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
[FR Doc. 06–3029 Filed 3–28–06; 8:45 am]
This regulation is effective
March 29, 2006. Objections and requests
for hearings must be received on or
before May 30, 2006.
ADDRESSES:
AGENCY:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with RULES
40 CFR Part 180
requested this tolerance under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), as amended by the Food
Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA).
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a
tolerance for residues of fenhexamid in
or on ginseng and pear. The
Interregional Research Project 4 (IR-4),
Center for Minor Crop Pest Management
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:34 Mar 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
To submit a written
objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in
Unit VI. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2004–0328. All documents in the
E:\FR\FM\29MRR1.SGM
29MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 60 (Wednesday, March 29, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15608-15612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-3029]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0105; FRL-7761-3]
Fenpropimorph; Pesticide Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of
fenpropimorph in or on bananas. BASF Corporation Agricultural Products
requested this tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.
DATES: This regulation is effective March 29, 2006. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before May 30, 2006.
ADDRESSES: To submit a written objection or hearing request follow the
detailed instructions as provided in Unit VI. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION. EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0105. 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: Lana Coppolino, Registration Division
(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-0086; e-mail address: coppolino.lana@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
Crop production (NAICS 111), e.g., agricultural workers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers.
Animal production (NAICS 112), e.g., cattle ranchers and
farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
Food manufacturing (NAICS 311), e.g., agricultural
workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers;
ranchers; pesticide applicators.
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 32532), e.g., agricultural
workers; commercial applicators; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and
floriculture workers; residential users.
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document and Other
Related Information?
In addition to using EDOCKET (https://www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may
access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA
Internet under the ``Federal Register'' listings at https://www.epa.gov/
fedrgstr/. A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
is available at E-CFR Beta Site Two at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/.
To access the OPPTS Harmonized Guidelines referenced in this document,
go directly to the guidelines at https://www.epa.gpo/opptsfrs/home/
guidelin.htm/.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of June 22, 2005 (70 FR 36155)(FRL-7710-1),
EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 7E4874)
by BASF Corporation Agricultural Products, 26 Davis Drive, P.O. Box
13528; Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition requested that 40
CFR 180.616 be amended by establishing a tolerance for residues of the
fungicide fenpropimorph, (+)-cis-4-(3-((4-tert-butylphenyl))-2-
methylpropyl)-2,6-dimethylmorpholine, in or on bananas at 1.5 parts per
million (ppm). This petition was previously published in the Federal
Register on December 7, 1998, identified by the docket control number
PF-848. That notice included a summary of the petition prepared by BASF
Corporation Agricultural Products, the registrant. There were no
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the
regulatory requirements of section 408 of the FFDCA and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://
[[Page 15609]]
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure, consistent with section
408(b)(2) of FFDCA, for a tolerance for residues of fenpropimorph on
bananas at 2.0 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated
with establishing the tolerance follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the toxic effects caused by fenpropimorph as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.epa.gov/opprd001/factsheets/.
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the dose at which no adverse effects are observed
(the NOAEL) from the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use
in risk assessment is used to estimate the toxicological level of
concern (LOC). However, the lowest dose at which adverse effects of
concern are identified (the LOAEL) is sometimes used for risk
assessment if no NOAEL was achieved in the toxicology study selected.
An uncertainty factor (UF) is applied to reflect uncertainties inherent
in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and in the
variations in sensitivity among members of the human population as well
as other unknowns.
The linear default risk methodology (Q*) is the primary method
currently used by the Agency to quantify non-threshold hazards such as
cancer. The Q* approach assumes that any amount of exposure will lead
to some degree of cancer risk, estimates risk in terms of the
probability of occurrence of additional cancer cases. More information
can be found on the general principles EPA uses in risk
characterization at https://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/trac/science.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for fenpropimorph used for
human risk assessment is shown in the following Table 1:
Table 1.--Summary of Toxicological Dose and Endpoints for Fenpropimorph for Use in Human Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dose Used in Risk
Assessment, Special FQPA SF and
Exposure/Scenario Interspecies and Level of Concern for Study and Toxicological
Intraspecies and any Risk Assessment Effects
Traditional UF
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (females 13-49 years of NOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day Special FQPA SF = 1X Rabbit developmental
age) UF = 100X.............. aPAD = acute RfD/ study
Acute RfD = 0.15 mg/kg/ Special FQPA SF = 0.15 LOAEL = 30 mg/kg/day
day. mg/kg/day. based on cleft palate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (all populations) NOAEL = 3.2 mg/kg/day Special FQPA SF = 1X One year dog and
UF = 100X.............. cPAD = chronic RfD/ chronic/
Chronic RfD = 0.032 mg/ Special FQPA SF = carcinogenicity rat
kg/day. 0.032 mg/kg/day. studies
LOAEL = 9-11 mg/kg/day
based on liver
histopathology
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: ``Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.'' No increased
incidences in tumors in a chronic/carcinogenicity rat study or a
carcinogenicity mouse study.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. This final rule
establishes the first tolerance for residues of fenpropimorph. There
are no registered uses in the United States, therefore, the only
expected exposure is from imported foods. Risk assessments were
conducted by EPA to assess dietary exposures from fenpropimorph in food
as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
The Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEMTM-FDIC)
Version 2.03 analysis evaluated the individual food consumption as
reported by respondents in the U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA),
1994-1996, and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII) and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each
commodity. The following assumptions were made for the acute exposure
assessments: The DEEMTM-FCID assessment was based on
tolerance-level residues in banana commodities, a processing factor of
3.9 for dried banana commodities, and 100% crop treated (CT)
assumptions. An acute dietary dose and an endpoint attributable to a
single dose were identified for only one population subgroup, females
ages 13 through 49. An appropriate endpoint attributable to a single
exposure was not identified for the general population.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the DEEM software with the FCID, Version 2.03,
which incorporates food consumption data as reported by respondents in
the USDA 1994-1996, and 1998 Nationwide CSFII, and accumulated exposure
to the chemical for each commodity. The following assumptions were made
for the chronic exposure assessments: The DEEM-FCID assessment was
based on tolerance-level residues in banana commodities, a processing
factor of 3.9 for dried banana commodities, and 100% CT assumptions.
iii. Cancer. The Agency classified fenpropimorph as ``not likely to
be carcinogenic to humans.'' There were no increased incidences of
benign or malignant tumors in either a rat chronic/carcinogenicity or a
mouse carcinogenicity study. Therefore, a quantitative cancer exposure
assessment was unnecessary.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. There is no expectation
that
[[Page 15610]]
fenpropimorph residues would occur in surface water or ground water
sources of drinking water. Fenpropimorph is proposed for use only on
imported bananas, the sole anticipated exposure route for the U.S
population is via dietary (food) exposure. There are no registered uses
of fenpropimorph in the United States.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Fenpropimorph is not
registered for use on any sites that would result in residential
exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. 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 fenpropimorph and any
other substances and fenpropimorph 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 fenpropimorph 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/.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the data base on toxicity and exposure
unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of
safety will be safe for infants and children. Margins of safety are
incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly through use of a
margin of exposure analysis or through using uncertainty (safety)
factors in calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable risk to
humans. In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X when reliable data do not support the choice of a
different factor, or, if reliable data are available, EPA uses a
different additional safety factor value based on the use of
traditional UFs and/or special FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. Although there is evidence
for increased qualitative susceptibility in the developmental rat and
rabbit studies, the Agency concluded that there is a low degree of
concern (and no residual uncertainty) because:
i. The increased susceptibility was seen at the LOAELs of 160
milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) in the rat study and at 30 mg/kg/
day in the rabbit study (NOAELs were 40 and 15 mg/kg/day for the rat
and rabbit studies, respectively);
ii. Cleft palate was not reported in a second rabbit developmental
study with doses up to 36 mg/kg/day;
iii. No mention was made of cleft palate in another developmental
rat study at doses up to 160 mg/kg/day (however, there were no visceral
or skeletal examinations of fetuses/pups);
iv. At doses up to 2.79 mg/kg/day in a 2-generation reproduction
study in rats, cleft palate was not reported;
v. Developmental effects were observed only in the presence of
maternal toxicity; and
vi. The doses selected for acute and chronic dietary exposure and
risk assessment were considerably lower than the doses at which
developmental effects were observed.
3. Conclusion. Based on the review of the toxicology database, the
Agency recommends that the Special FQPA Safety Factor (10X) be removed
(reduced to 1X). This recommendation is applicable to all population
subgroups for all exposure routes and durations, and is based on the
following factors:
i. There is a complete toxicity data base.
ii.There is a low degree of concern for the qualitative
susceptibility in developmental rat and rabbit studies, because the
fetal effects were observed only in the presence of maternal toxicity.
iii. There is no concern for prenatal/postnatal toxicity since no
off-spring toxicity was seen in the 2 generation reproduction study.
iv. The endpoints of concern are addressed in this risk assessment.
v. The dietary exposure assessment assumed tolerance level residues
and 100% CT.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food to
fenpropimorph will occupy 2.6% of the acute population adjusted dose
(aPAD) for females ages 13 through 49. An appropriate endpoint
attributable to a single exposure was not identified for the general
population nor any of the other population subgroup. Aggregate risk is
limited to dietary exposure (food only). EPA does not expect the
aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of the aPAD.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to
fenpropimorph from food will utilize 2.2% of the cPAD for the U.S.
population, 9.1% of the cPAD for all infants <1 year, and 11% of the
cPAD for children 1-2 years, the population subgroup having the higest
exposure.Aggregate risk is limited to dietary exposure (food only). EPA
does not expect the aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of the cPAD.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background exposure level).
Fenpropimorph is not registered for use on any sites that would
result in residential exposure, and there is no expectation that
fenpropimorph residues would occur via drinking water consumption.
Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from food only,
which does not exceed the Agency's level of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
Fenpropimorph is not registered for use on any sites that would
result in residential exposure, and there is no expectation that
fenpropimorph residues would occur via drinking water consumption.
Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from food only,
which does not exceed the Agency's level of concern.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Fenpropimorph has not
been shown to be carcinogenic. Therefore, fenpropimorph is not expected
to pose a cancer risk.
[[Page 15611]]
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, and to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to fenpropimorph residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
The proposed method is adequate for collecting data on residues in
bananas. Adequate method validation data were submitted. The method has
been adequately radiovalidated, and has undergone a marginally
successful independent laboratory validation (ILV) trial. The
petitioner has been requested to submit acceptable recovery data from
bananas using other suggested methods.
The method, gas chromatography with nitrogen-phosphorous detection
(GC/NPD), is available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method
may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350;
telephone number: (410) 305-2905; e-mail address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
There are no established Mexican or Canadian maximum residue limits
(MRLs) for fenpropimorph residues. There are Codex MRLs established for
fenpropimorph residues in various commodities, including an MRL of 2
mg/kg in bananas.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, the tolerance is established for residues of
fenpropimorph, [rel-(2R,6S)-4-[3-[4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)phenyl]-2-
methylpropyl]-2,6-dimethylmorpholine], in or on banana at 2.0 ppm with
no U.S. registration.
VI. Objections and Hearing Requests
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, as amended by FQPA, any person may
file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request
a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural regulations which
govern the submission of objections and requests for hearings appear in
40 CFR part 178. Although the procedures in those regulations require
some modification to reflect the amendments made to FFDCA by FQPA, EPA
will continue to use those procedures, with appropriate adjustments,
until the necessary modifications can be made. The new section 408(g)
of FFDCA provides essentially the same process for persons to
``object'' to a regulation for an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance issued by EPA under new section 408(d) of FFDCA, as was
provided in the old sections 408 and 409 of FFDCA. However, the period
for filing objections is now 60 days, rather than 30 days.
A. What Do I Need to Do to File an Objection or Request a Hearing?
You must file your objection or request a hearing on this
regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in this unit
and in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0105 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and
must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before March 30,
2006.
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 issue(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.
2. 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.
3. Copies for the Docket. In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in Unit VI.A., you
should also send a copy of your request to the PIRIB for its inclusion
in the official record that is described in ADDRESSES. Mail your
copies, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0105, to: Public
Information and Records Integrity Branch, Information Technology and
Resource Management 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 issue(s) in the manner sought
by the requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested (40
CFR 178.32).
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of
significance, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This final rule does
not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose
any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law
104-4). Nor does it require any special considerations under Executive
Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice
in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629,
February 16,
[[Page 15612]]
1994); or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not
involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration
of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA),
Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since
tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a
petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply. In addition, the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' This final rule directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action
does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has
determined that this rule does not have any ``tribal implications'' as
described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6,
2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in
the development of regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.''``Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in
the Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial
direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.'' This rule will not have substantial
direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this rule.
VIII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: March 20, 2006.
James Jones,
Director, 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. Section 180.616 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 180.616 Fenpropimorph; tolerances for residues.
Tolerances are established for the residues of the fungicide
fenpropimorph (rel-(2R,6S)-4-[3-[4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)phenyl]-2-
methylpropyl]-2,6-dimethylmorpholine) in or on the following commodity:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Banana*........................................ 2.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*No U.S. registration as of February 10, 2006.
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 06-3029 Filed 3-28-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S