Metconazole; Pesticide Tolerances for Emergency Exemptions, 76190-76197 [E6-21493]
Download as PDF
76190
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
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: December 8, 2006.
Donald R. Stubbs,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.589 is amended in the
table to paragraph (a)(1) by removing the
commodities ‘‘celery’’ and ‘‘spinach’’
and by adding alphabetically new
commodities to read as follows:
I
§ 180.589 Boscalid; tolerances for
residues.
(a)* * *
(1)* * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Leafy greens, subgroup 4A, except head and leaf lettuce ....
Leafy petioles, subgroup 4B .....
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
60
45
*
*
[FR Doc. E6–21491 Filed 12–19–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0655; FRL–8095–4]
Metconazole; Pesticide Tolerances for
Emergency Exemptions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
time-limited tolerances for residues of
the fungicide metconazole, 5-[(4SUMMARY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 19, 2006
Jkt 211001
chlorophenyl)methyl]-2,2-dimethyl-1(1H -1,2,4-triazole-1-ylmethyl)cyclopentanol in or on aspirated
grain fractions; egg; meat, fat and meat
by-products of cattle, goat, hog, horse,
poultry and sheep; milk; soybean, hulls;
soybean, meal; soybean, refined oil; and
soybean, seed. This action is associated
with EPA’s granting of an emergency
exemption under section 18 of the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) authorizing
use of the pesticide on soybeans. This
regulation establishes a maximum
permissible level for residues of
metconazole in these food commodities.
These tolerances will expire and be
revoked on December 31, 2010.
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 20, 2006. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 20, 2007, and
must be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2006–0655. All documents in the
docket are listed on the regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (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 in the electronic docket
at https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the Office of
Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory
Public Docket in Room S-4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 South
Crystal Dr. Arlington, VA 22202-3553.
The hours of operation of this Docket
Facility are 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:
Carmen Rodia, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 306–0327; fax: (703) 308–8041; email address: rodia.carmen@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
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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?
In addition to accessing an electronic
copy of this Federal Register document
through the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may access
this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may
also access a frequently updated
electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
through the Government Printing
Office’s pilot e-CFR site at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing
Request?
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, as
amended by the Food Quality Protection
Act of 1996 (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.
You must file your objection or request
a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2006–0655 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 February 20, 2007.
In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please
submit a copy of the filing that does not
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
contain any CBI for inclusion in the
public docket that is described in
ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2
may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit your
copies, identified by docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0655, by one of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP), Regulatory Public Docket
(7502P), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental
Protection Agency, Room S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 South
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA 22202–3553.
Deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation
(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket telephone number is (703) 305–
5805.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
EPA, on its own initiative, in
accordance with sections 408(e) and
408(l)(6) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a,
is establishing time-limited tolerances
for residues of the fungicide
metconazole in or on aspirated grain
fractions at 1.00 parts per million (ppm);
egg at 0.02 ppm; meat, fat and meat byproducts of cattle, goat, hog, horse,
poultry and sheep at 0.02 ppm; milk at
0.02 ppm; soybean, hulls at 1.20 ppm;
soybean, meal at 0.25 ppm; soybean,
refined oil at 1.20 ppm; and soybean,
seed at 0.10 ppm. These tolerances will
expire and be revoked on December 31,
2010. EPA will publish a document in
the Federal Register to remove the
revoked tolerances from the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR).
Section 408(l)(6) of FFDCA requires
EPA to establish a time-limited
tolerance or exemption from the
requirement for a tolerance for pesticide
chemical residues in food that will
result from the use of a pesticide under
an emergency exemption granted by
EPA under section 18 of FIFRA. Such
tolerances can be established without
providing notice or period for public
comment. EPA does not intend for its
actions on section 18 related tolerances
to set binding precedents for the
application of the section 408 safety
standard to other tolerances and
exemptions. Section 408(e) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance or an
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 19, 2006
Jkt 211001
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance on its own initiative, i.e.,
without having received any petition
from an outside party.
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. . . .’’
Section 18 of the FIFRA authorizes
EPA to exempt any Federal or State
agency from any provision of FIFRA, if
EPA determines that ‘‘emergency
conditions exist which require such
exemption.’’ This provision was not
amended by the FQPA. EPA has
established regulations governing such
emergency exemptions in 40 CFR part
166.
III. Emergency Exemption for
Metconazole on Soybeans and FFDCA
Tolerances
Australasian soybean rust (SBR) is a
plant disease caused by two fungal
species, Phakopsora pachyrhizi and P.
meibomiae, and is spread primarily by
windborne spores that can be
transported over long distances. SBR
models suggest that most of the soybean
acreage in the United States could be
compromised by an SBR epidemic. In
accordance with the 2002 Agricultural
Bioterrorism Protection Act, SBR was
identified by the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) as a
select biological agent with the potential
to pose a severe threat to the soybean
industry and livestock production, in
general. As such, USDA has invested in
extensive readiness and outreach
activities among soybean producers.
The States of Minnesota and South
Dakota petitioned EPA to allow under
FIFRA section 18 the use of
metconazole on soybeans for control of
SBR in Minnesota and South Dakota.
After having reviewed the submission,
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76191
EPA concurs that emergency conditions
exist for these States.
As part of its assessment of this
emergency exemption, EPA assessed the
potential risks presented by residues of
metconazole in or on aspirated grain
fractions; egg; meat, fat and meat byproducts of cattle, goat, hog, horse,
poultry and sheep; milk; soybean, hulls;
soybean, meal; soybean, refined oil; and
soybean, seed. In doing so, EPA
considered the safety standard in
section 408(b)(2) of FFDCA, and EPA
decided that the necessary tolerance
under section 408(l)(6) of FFDCA would
be consistent with the safety standard
and with FIFRA section 18. Consistent
with the need to move quickly on the
emergency exemption in order to
address an urgent non-routine situation
and to ensure that the resulting food is
safe and lawful, EPA is issuing these
tolerances without notice and
opportunity for public comment as
provided in section 408(l)(6) of FFDCA.
Although these tolerances will expire
and be revoked on December 31, 2010,
under section 408(l)(5) of FFDCA,
residues of the pesticide not in excess
of the amounts specified in the
tolerance remaining in or on aspirated
grain fractions; egg; meat, fat and meat
by-products of cattle, goat, hog, horse,
poultry and sheep; milk; soybean, hulls;
soybean, meal; soybean, refined oil; and
soybean, seed after that date will not be
unlawful, provided the pesticide is
applied in a manner that was lawful
under FIFRA, and the residues do not
exceed a level that was authorized by
these tolerances at the time of that
application. EPA will take action to
revoke these tolerances earlier if any
experience with, scientific data on, or
other relevant information on this
pesticide indicate that the residues are
not safe.
Because these tolerances are being
approved under emergency conditions,
EPA has not made any decisions about
whether metconazole meets EPA’s
registration requirements for use in
soybeans or whether permanent
tolerances for this use would be
appropriate. Under these circumstances,
EPA does not believe that these
tolerances serve as a basis for
registration of metconazole by a State
for special local needs under FIFRA
section 24(c). Nor do these tolerances
serve as the basis for growers in any
State other than those in which State
lead agencies have obtained an
exemption to use this pesticide on this
crop under section 18 of FIFRA without
following all provisions of EPA’s
regulations implementing FIFRA section
18 as identified in 40 CFR part 166. For
additional information regarding the
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
76192
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
emergency exemption for metconazole,
contact the Agency’s Registration
Division at the address provided under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
EPA performs a number of analyses to
determine the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide residues. For
further discussion of the regulatory
requirements of section 408 of FFDCA
and a complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/
November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
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 metconazole and to make
a determination on aggregate exposure,
consistent with section 408(b)(2) of
FFDCA, for time-limited tolerances for
residues of metconazole in or on
aspirated grain fractions at 1.00 ppm;
egg at 0.02 ppm; meat, fat and meat byproducts of cattle, goat, hog, horse,
poultry and sheep at 0.02 ppm; milk at
0.02 ppm; soybean, hulls at 1.20 ppm;
soybean, meal at 0.25 ppm; soybean,
refined oil at 1.20 ppm; and soybean,
seed at 0.10 ppm. EPA’s assessment of
the dietary exposures and risks
associated with establishing these
tolerances follows.
A. Toxicological Endpoints
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
endpoint. 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. An UF of 100 is
routinely used, 10x to account for
interspecies differences and 10x for
intraspecies differences.
For dietary risk assessment (other
than cancer), the Agency uses the UF to
calculate an acute or chronic reference
dose (aRfD or cRfD) where the RfD is
equal to the NOAEL divided by the
appropriate UF (RfD = NOAEL/UF).
Where an additional safety factor is
retained due to concerns unique to the
FQPA, this additional factor is applied
to the RfD by dividing the RfD by such
additional factor. The acute or chronic
Population Adjusted Dose (aPAD or
cPAD) is a modification of the RfD to
accommodate this type of FQPA SF.
For non-dietary risk assessments
(other than cancer) the UF is used to
determine the level of concern (LOC).
For example, when 100 is the
appropriate UF (10x to account for
interspecies differences and 10x for
intraspecies differences), the LOC is
100. To estimate risk, a ratio of the
NOAEL to exposures (margin of
exposure (MOE) = NOAEL/exposure) is
calculated and compared to the LOC.
The linear default risk methodology
(Q*) is the primary method currently
used by the Agency to quantify
carcinogenic risk. The Q* approach
assumes that any amount of exposure
will lead to some degree of cancer risk.
A Q* is calculated and used to estimate
risk which represents a probability of
occurrence of additional cancer cases
(e.g., risk is expressed as 1 x 10-6 or one
in a million). Under certain specific
circumstances, MOE calculations will
be used for the carcinogenic risk
assessment. In this non-linear approach,
a ‘‘point of departure’’ is identified
below which carcinogenic effects are
not expected. The point of departure is
typically a NOAEL based on an
endpoint related to cancer effects
though it may be a different value
derived from the dose response curve.
To estimate risk, a ratio of the point of
departure to exposure (MOEcancer = point
of departure/exposures) is calculated. A
summary of the toxicological endpoints
for metconazole used for human risk
assessment is shown in Table 1 of this
unit:
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSE AND ENDPOINTS FOR METCONAZOLE FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK
ASSESSMENT
Dose Used in Risk Assessment, UF
Exposure/Scenario
FQPA SF and Level of
Concern for Risk Assessment
Study and Toxicological Effects
Not applicable
None
An endpoint of concern (effect) attributable to a
single exposure (dose) for the U.S. general
population was not identified in the oral toxicity studies reviewed.
Acute Dietary (Females 13-49
years of age)
NOAEL = 12.0 milligram/
kilogram/day (mg/kg/day)
UF = 100x
Acute RfD = 0.12 mg/kg/
day
FQPA SF = 1x
aPAD = acute RfD ÷ FQPA
SF = 0.12 mg/kg/day
Developmental toxicity—rat; LOAEL = 30.0 mg/
kg/day based on increases in skeletal variations.
Chronic Dietary (All populations)
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Acute Dietary (U.S. general population including infants and
children)
NOAEL= 4.3 mg/kg/day
UF = 100x
Chronic RfD = 0.04 mg/kg/
day
FQPA SF = 1x
cPAD = chronic RfD ÷
FQPA SF = 0.04 mg/kg/
day
Chronic oral toxicity - rat; LOAEL = 13.1 mg/kg/
day based on increased liver weights and
associated hepatocellular lipid vacuolation
and centrilobular hypertrophy observed in
males. Similar effects were observed in females at 54 mg/kg/day, plus increased
spleen weight.
Short-Term Incidental Oral (1 to
30 days)
NOAEL = 9.1 mg/kg/day
UF = 100x
LOC for MOE = 100
28-day oral toxicity - rat; LOAEL = 90.5 mg/kg/
day based on decreased body weight gain in
males, increased liver and kidney weight and
hepatocellular hypertrophy and vacuolation in
both sexes.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 19, 2006
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
76193
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSE AND ENDPOINTS FOR METCONAZOLE FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK
ASSESSMENT—Continued
Dose Used in Risk Assessment, UF
Exposure/Scenario
FQPA SF and Level of
Concern for Risk Assessment
Study and Toxicological Effects
NOAEL = 6.4 mg/kg/day
UF =100 x
LOC for MOE = 100
90-day oral toxicity—rat; LOAEL = 19.2 mg/kg/
day based on hepatic vacuolation in males
and increased spleen weight in females.
Short-Term Dermal (1 to 30
days)
NOAEL = 9.1 mg/kg/day
UF = 100x (dermal absorption rate = 5%)
LOC for MOE = 100
28-day oral toxicity—rat; LOAEL = 90.5 mg/kg/
day based on decreased body weight gain in
males, increased liver and kidney weight and
hepatocellular hypertrophy and vacuolation in
both sexes.
Intermediate-Term Dermal(1 to
6 months)
NOAEL = 6.4 mg/kg/day
UF = 100x (dermal absorption rate = 5%)
LOC for MOE = 100
90-day oral toxicity—rat; LOAEL = 19.2 mg/kg/
day based on hepatic vacuolation in males
and increased spleen weight in females.
Long-Term Dermal (>6 months)
NOAEL= 4.3 mg/kg/day
UF = 100x (dermal absorption rate = 5%)
LOC for MOE = 100
Chronic oral toxicity—rat; LOAEL = 13.1 mg/kg/
day based on increased liver weights and
associated hepatocellular lipid vacuolation
and centrilobular hypertrophy observed in
males. Similar effects were observed in females at 54 mg/kg/day, plus increased
spleen weight.
Short-Term Inhalation (1 to 30
days)
NOAEL= 9.1 mg/kg/day
UF = 100x (inhalation-absorption rate = 100% oral
equivalent)
LOC for MOE = 100
28-day oral toxicity—rat; LOAEL = 90.5 mg/kg/
day based on decreased body weight gain in
males, increased liver and kidney weight and
hepatocellular hypertrophy and vacuolation in
both sexes.
Intermediate-Term Inhalation (1
to 6 months)
NOAEL= 6.4 mg/kg/day
UF = 100x (inhalation-absorption rate = 100% oral
equivalent)
LOC for MOE = 100
90-day oral toxicity—rat; LOAEL = 19.2 mg/kg/
day based on hepatic vacuolation in males
and increased spleen weight in females.
Long-Term Inhalation (>6
months)
NOAEL= 4.3 mg/kg/day
UF = 100x (inhalation-absorption rate = 100% oral
equivalent)
LOC for MOE = 100
Chronic oral toxicity—rat; LOAEL = 13.1 mg/kg/
day based on increased liver weights and
associated hepatocellular lipid vacuolation
and centrilobular hypertrophy observed in
males. Similar effects were observed in females at 54 mg/kg/day, plus increased
spleen weight.
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation)
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Intermediate-Term Incidental
Oral(1 to 6 months)
Metconazole has been classified as ‘‘not likely to be carcinogenic in humans.’’ As a result, a quantified carcinogenic assessment (Q* approach) is not required for metconazole.
B. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. Metconazole is not currently
registered for any use in the United
States. An import tolerance has been
established for metconazole on bananas.
Risk assessments were conducted by
EPA to assess dietary exposures from
metconazole in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Acute dietary risk
assessments are performed for a fooduse pesticide if a toxicological study has
indicated the possibility of an effect of
concern occurring as a result of a one
day or single exposure. The Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Model software
with the Food Commodity Intake
Database (DEEM–FCIDTM) analysis
evaluated the individual food
consumption as reported by
respondents in the USDA 1994–1996
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 19, 2006
Jkt 211001
and 1998 nationwide Continuing
Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals
(CSFII) and accumulated exposure to
the chemical for each commodity.
The acute dietary exposure analysis
for metconazole was conducted for the
proposed food use and drinking water.
Except for drinking water, the acute
analysis is based on Tier 1 assumptions
of the proposed/recommended
tolerance-level residues and 100% crop
treated (CT). A Tier 2 drinking water
assessment for the proposed use in
soybeans was performed using the
Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure
Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/
EXAMS) model with index reservoir
(IR) scenarios and percent cropped area
(PCA) adjustment factors. Estimated
concentrations of metconazole in
drinking water (from use in soybeans)
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
were incorporated directly into the
acute dietary risk assessment.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary risk assessment, the
DEEM-FCIDTM analysis evaluated the
individual food consumption as
reported by respondents in the USDA
1994-1996 and 1998 nationwide CSFII
and accumulated exposure to the
chemical for each commodity.
The chronic dietary exposure analysis
for metconazole was conducted for the
proposed food use and drinking water.
Except for drinking water, the chronic
analysis is based on Tier 1 assumptions
of the proposed/recommended
tolerance-level residues and 100% CT.
A Tier 2 drinking water assessment for
the proposed use in soybeans was
performed using PRZM/EXAMS model
with IR scenarios and PCA adjustment
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
76194
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
factors. As with the acute analysis,
estimated concentrations of
metconazole in drinking water (from use
in soybeans) were incorporated directly
into the chronic dietary risk assessment.
As a result, all acute and chronic
dietary risk estimates were less than the
Agency’s LOC for the U.S. general
population and all population
subgroups (i.e., they are all less than
100% of the aPAD and cPAD).
iii. Cancer. Metconazole has been
classified as ‘‘not likely to be
carcinogenic in humans’’ based on
convincing evidence that carcinogenic
effects are not likely below a defined
dose range. As a result, a quantified
carcinogenic assessment (Q* approach)
is not required for metconazole.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used the PRZM/
EXAMS to calculate estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) for the
use of metconazole in soybeans, using
the IR scenarios and PCA adjustment
factors. Thus, the estimated exposure
concentrations for water are based on
the proposed highest use rate. Ground
water concentrations were estimated
with the Screening Concentration in
Ground Water (SCI-GROW) model.
A Tier 2 drinking water assessment
was conducted for the proposed use of
metconazole in soybeans using the
proposed maximum application rate of
0.07 lbs. a.i./acre with 2 applications
per year and a 10- to 21-day RTI. The
preharvest interval (PHI) will be 30
days. Based on PRZM/EXAMS, the
EDWCs for metconazole in surface water
are 1.57 parts per billion (ppb) and 0.48
ppb for acute and chronic (non-cancer)
exposures, respectively. For chronic/
cancer assessments, the 30-year annual
average from PRZM/EXAMS is 0.34
ppb. The EDWC for both acute and
chronic exposures is estimated as 0.04
ppb for ground water using the SCIGROW model.
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).
Metconazole 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 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 19, 2006
Jkt 211001
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
Metconazole is a member of the
triazole-containing class of pesticides.
Although conazoles act similarly in
plants (fungi) by inhibiting ergosterol
biosynthesis, there is not necessarily a
relationship between their pesticidal
activity and their mechanism of toxicity
in mammals. Structural similarities do
not constitute a common mechanism of
toxicity. Evidence is needed to establish
that the chemicals operate by the same,
or essentially the same sequence of
major biochemical events (EPA, 2002).
In conazoles, however, a variable
pattern of toxicological responses is
found. Some are hepatotoxic and
hepatocarcinogenic in mice. Some
induce thyroid tumors in rats. Some
induce developmental, reproductive,
and neurological effects in rodents.
Furthermore, the conazoles produce a
diverse range of biochemical events
including altered cholesterol levels,
stress responses, and altered DNA
methylation). It is not clearly
understood whether these biochemical
events are directly connected to their
toxicological outcomes. Thus, there is
currently no evidence to indicate that
conazoles share common mechanisms of
toxicity and EPA is not following a
cumulative risk approach based on a
common mechanism of toxicity for the
conazoles. For information regarding
EPA’s procedures for cumulating effects
from substances found to have a
common mechanism of toxicity, see
EPA’s website at https://www.epa.gov/
pesticides/cumulative.
Metconazole is a triazole-derived
pesticide. This class of compounds can
form the common metabolite 1,2,4triazole and two triazole conjugates
(triazole alanine and triazole acetic
acid). To support existing tolerances
and to establish new tolerances for
triazole-derivative pesticides, including
metconazole, EPA conducted a human
health risk assessment for exposure to
1,2 4-triazole, triazole alanine and
triazole acetic acid resulting from the
use of all current and pending uses of
triazole-derived fungicide. The risk
assessment is a highly conservative,
screening-level evaluation in terms of
hazards associated with the common
metabolites (e.g., use of maximum
combination of uncertainty factors) and
potential dietary and non-dietary
exposures (i.e., high-end estimates of
both dietary and non-dietary exposures).
In addition, the Agency retained the
additional 10x FQPA safety factor for
the protection of infants and children.
The assessment includes evaluations of
risks for various population subgroups,
including those comprised of infants
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and children. The Agency’s complete
risk assessment is found in the
propiconazole reregistration docket at
https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–0497–
0013.
C. 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 preand/or post-natal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
that a different margin of safety will be
safe for infants and children. Margins of
safety are incorporated into EPA risk
assessments either directly through use
of a MOE analysis or through using
uncertainty (safety) factors in
calculating a dose level that poses no
appreciable risk to humans.
2. Developmental toxicity studies.
Developmental studies in rats and
rabbits show some evidence of
developmental effects (skeletal
variations, post-implantation loss,
reduction in fetal body weight), but only
at dose levels that are maternally toxic.
In the developmental toxicity study in
rats, skeletal variations (predominantly
lumbar ribs) occurred in the presence of
maternal toxicity (decreased body
weight gains). In the pre-natal
developmental toxicity study in rabbits,
developmental effects (increased postimplantation loss and reduced fetal
body weights) were observed at the
same dose that caused maternal toxicity
(decreased body weight gains, reduced
food consumption and alterations in
hematology parameters). In the 2generation reproduction study in rats
with cis metconazole, offspring toxicity
(reduced fetal body weights in F1 and F2
offspring) were observed only at the
highest tested dose which also resulted
in evidence of parental toxicity (reduced
parental body weight gains and
increased ovarian weight). The chemical
is non-genotoxic and not likely to be
carcinogenic below a defined dose range
based on bioassays in the rat and the
mouse combined with a lack of in vitro
or in vivo mutagenicity. Metconazole
did not demonstrate the potential for
neurotoxicity in the four species
(mouse, rat, dog and rabbit) tested.
NOAELs/LOAELs are well characterized
and are used as endpoints for
appropriate risk assessments.
There are adequate data in the
metconazole toxicology database to
characterize the potential for pre- and/
or post-natal risks to infants and
children: a 2-generation reproduction
study in rats (cis-only isomer; one with
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
the cis/trans mixture has been
completed and will be submitted in the
near future); a developmental study in
rats; and several developmental studies
with rabbits. The effects seen in these
studies do not suggest that pups are
more susceptible: pup effects were only
seen in the presence of maternal toxicity
and, in general, were of comparable or
less severity to the effects observed in
adults. Thus, there are no residual
uncertainties for pre- and/or post-natal
exposure to metconazole and the
Agency has determined that the special
FQPA safety factor can be reduced to 1x.
3. Reproductive toxicity study. In the
submitted 2-generation reproduction
study in rats with cis metconazole,
offspring toxicity (reduced fetal body
weights in F1 and F2 offspring) was
observed only at the highest tested dose,
which also resulted in evidence of
parental toxicity (reduced parental body
weight gains and increased ovarian
weight). As discussed in Unit IV.C.2.,
there are no residual uncertainties for
pre- and/or post-natal exposure to
metconazole.
4. Pre-natal and post-natal sensitivity.
Please refer to the explanation provided
in Unit IV.C.2. for a detailed discussion
regarding ‘‘pre- and/or post-natal
sensitivity.’’
5. Conclusion. The Agency evaluated
the quality of the hazard and exposure
database for metconazole to characterize
its potential for pre- and/or post-natal
risks to infants and children. The effects
observed in the developmental and
reproductive studies do not suggest that
pups are more susceptible; pup effects
were only seen in the presence of
maternal toxicity and, in general, were
of comparable or less severity to the
effects observed in adults. Thus, based
on the hazard and exposure data, the
special FQPA SF is reduced to 1x as
there are low concerns and no residual
uncertainties with regard to pre- and/or
post-natal toxicity.
D. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA conducted human health risk
assessments for acute, chronic and
cancer dietary exposures (food +
drinking water only) for the proposed
use. Because there are no uses of
metconazole that are expected to result
in residential exposures, this aggregate
risk assessment takes into consideration
dietary (food + drinking water) exposure
only; therefore, the acute and chronic
aggregate estimates would be the same
as the dietary exposure results.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit, the
acute dietary exposure from food and
water to metconazole will occupy 1% of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 19, 2006
Jkt 211001
the aPAD for females 13–49 years old,
the population subgroup of concern.
Given the proposed use, the Agency has
no risk concern for exposure to
metconazole through food and/or
drinking water. 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 metconazole from food
and water will utilize 2% of the cPAD
for the U.S. general population and 5%
of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old.
There are no residential uses for
metconazole that will result in chronic
residential exposure to metconazole.
Given the proposed use, the Agency has
no risk concern for exposure to
metconazole through food and/or
drinking water. EPA does not expect the
aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of
the cPAD.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk.
Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and drinking
water (considered to be a background
exposure level). Intermediate-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
non-dietary, non-occupational exposure
plus chronic exposure to food and
drinking water (considered to be a
background exposure level). Since
metconazole is not registered for use on
any sites that would result in residential
exposure, short- and intermediate-term
aggregate risk assessments are not
needed.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Metconazole is ‘‘not likely
to be carcinogenic in humans’’ based on
convincing evidence that carcinogenic
effects are not likely below a defined
dose range. A non-genotoxic mode of
action for mouse liver tumors was
established. No quantification is
required.
5. Determination of safety. Based on
all these considerations, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the U.S. general
population and to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to metconazole
residues.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An adequate enforcement
methodology (example—gas
chromatography) is available to enforce
the tolerance expression. The method
may be requested from: Chief,
Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Road, Ft. Meade, MD 20755–
5350; telephone number: (410) 305–
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76195
2905; e-mail address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
No CODEX, Canadian or Mexican
maximum residue limits (MRLs) or
tolerances have been established for
metconazole in or on soybeans. Further,
no provisional MRL has been
established in Japan for imported
soybeans. Therefore, international
harmonization is not an issue at this
time.
VI. Conclusion
Therefore, time-limited tolerances are
established for residues of metconazole
in or on aspirated grain fractions at 1.00
ppm; egg at 0.02 ppm; meat, fat and
meat by-products of cattle, goat, hog,
horse, poultry and sheep at 0.02 ppm;
milk at 0.02 ppm; soybean, hulls at 1.20
ppm; soybean, meal at 0.25 ppm;
soybean, refined oil at 1.20 ppm; and
soybean, seed at 0.10 ppm.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes a timelimited tolerance under section 408 of
FFDCA. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory
Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this rule has
been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of
significance, this rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This final rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any
enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public
Law 104–4). Nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive
Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994); or OMB review or any Agency
action under Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
76196
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
(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 FIFRA
section 18 exemption under section 408
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: December 5, 2006.
Donald R. Stubbs,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.617 is amended by
adding text and table to paragraph (b) to
read as follows:
I
§ 180.617 Metconazole; tolerances for
residues.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
Time-limited tolerances are established
for residues of the fungicide
metconazole, 5-[(4chlorophenyl)methyl]-2,2-dimethyl-1(1H -1,2,4-triazole-1-ylmethyl)cyclopentanol in or on aspirated
grain fractions; egg; meat, fat and meat
by-products of cattle, goat, hog, horse,
poultry and sheep; milk; soybean, hulls;
soybean, meal; soybean, refined oil; and
soybean, seed in connection with the
use of the pesticide under section 18
emergency exemptions granted by EPA.
The tolerances will expire and be
revoked on the date specified in the
following table.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Commodity
Parts per million
Aspirated grain fractions ..............................................................................................................................
Cattle, fat .....................................................................................................................................................
Cattle, meat .................................................................................................................................................
Cattle, meat byproducts ...............................................................................................................................
Egg ...............................................................................................................................................................
Goat, fat .......................................................................................................................................................
Goat, meat ...................................................................................................................................................
Goat, meat byproducts ................................................................................................................................
Hog, fat ........................................................................................................................................................
Hog, meat ....................................................................................................................................................
Hog, meat byproducts .................................................................................................................................
Horse, fat .....................................................................................................................................................
Horse, meat .................................................................................................................................................
Horse, meat byproducts ..............................................................................................................................
Milk ...............................................................................................................................................................
Poultry, fat ....................................................................................................................................................
Poultry, meat ................................................................................................................................................
Poulty, meat byproducts ..............................................................................................................................
Sheep, fat ....................................................................................................................................................
Sheep, meat ................................................................................................................................................
Sheep, meat byproducts ..............................................................................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 19, 2006
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
1.00
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
20DER1
Expiration/revocation date
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Commodity
Soybean,
Soybean,
Soybean,
Soybean,
*
*
hulls .............................................................................................................................................
meal .............................................................................................................................................
refined oil .....................................................................................................................................
seed .............................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E6–21493 Filed 12–19–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0942; FRL–8105–4]
Extension of Tolerances for
Emergency Exemptions (Multiple
Chemicals)
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Parts per million
SUMMARY: This regulation extends timelimited tolerances for the pesticides
listed in this document. These actions
are in response to EPA’s granting of
emergency exemptions under section 18
of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
authorizing use of these pesticides.
Section 408(l)(6) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
requires EPA to establish a time-limited
tolerance or exemption from the
requirement for a tolerance for pesticide
chemical residues in food that will
result from the use of a pesticide under
an emergency exemption granted by
EPA.
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 20, 2006. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 20, 2007, and
must be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2006–0942. All documents in the
docket are listed on the regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (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 in the electronic docket
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 19, 2006
Jkt 211001
at https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the Office of
Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory
Public Docket, Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are
from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is (703) 305–5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: See
the table in this unit for the name of a
specific contact person. The following
information applies to all contact
persons: Emergency Response Team,
Registration Division (7505P), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–
0001.
Pesticide/CFR
section
Contact person
Acibenzolar-Smethyl,
180.561
Mancozeb,
180.176
Libby Pemberton
pemberton.libby@epa.gov
(703) 308–9364
Bifenthrin,
180.442
Thiophanatemethyl,
180.371
Andrea Conrath
conrath.andrea@epa.gov
(703) 308–9356
Flufenacet,
180.527
Propyzamide,
180.317
Andrew Ertman
ertman.andrew@epa.gov
(703) 308–9367
Zoxamide,
180.567
Stacey Groce
groce.stacey@epa.gov
(703) 305–2505
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).
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1.20
0.25
1.20
0.10
76197
Expiration/revocation date
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
12/31/10
• 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
one of the persons listed in the table
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies
of this Document?
In addition to accessing an electronic
copy of this Federal Register document
through the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may access
this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may
also access a frequently updated
electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
through the Government Printing
Office’s pilot e-CFR site at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing
Request?
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, as
amended by the Food Quality Protection
Act of 1996 (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.
You must file your objection or request
a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2006–0942 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 February 20, 2007.
In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 244 (Wednesday, December 20, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76190-76197]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-21493]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0655; FRL-8095-4]
Metconazole; Pesticide Tolerances for Emergency Exemptions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes time-limited tolerances for
residues of the fungicide metconazole, 5-[(4-chlorophenyl)methyl]-2,2-
dimethyl-1-(1H -1,2,4-triazole-1-yl-methyl)cyclopentanol in or on
aspirated grain fractions; egg; meat, fat and meat by-products of
cattle, goat, hog, horse, poultry and sheep; milk; soybean, hulls;
soybean, meal; soybean, refined oil; and soybean, seed. This action is
associated with EPA's granting of an emergency exemption under section
18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
authorizing use of the pesticide on soybeans. This regulation
establishes a maximum permissible level for residues of metconazole in
these food commodities. These tolerances will expire and be revoked on
December 31, 2010.
DATES: This regulation is effective December 20, 2006. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 20, 2007,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0655. All documents in the
docket are listed on the regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information (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 in the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the Office
of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket in Room S-4400,
One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 South Crystal Dr. Arlington, VA
22202-3553. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are 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: Carmen Rodia, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 306-0327; fax: (703) 308-8041; e-mail address:
rodia.carmen@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?
In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this Federal
Register document through the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may also access a
frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 through the
Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR site at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, as amended by the Food Quality
Protection Act of 1996 (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. You
must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2006-0655 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 February 20, 2007.
In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing that does not
[[Page 76191]]
contain any CBI for inclusion in the public docket that is described in
ADDRESSES. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part
2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit your
copies, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0655, by one of
the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Regulatory
Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Room S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 South Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA 22202-3553. Deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
EPA, on its own initiative, in accordance with sections 408(e) and
408(l)(6) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a, is establishing time-limited tolerances for residues of
the fungicide metconazole in or on aspirated grain fractions at 1.00
parts per million (ppm); egg at 0.02 ppm; meat, fat and meat by-
products of cattle, goat, hog, horse, poultry and sheep at 0.02 ppm;
milk at 0.02 ppm; soybean, hulls at 1.20 ppm; soybean, meal at 0.25
ppm; soybean, refined oil at 1.20 ppm; and soybean, seed at 0.10 ppm.
These tolerances will expire and be revoked on December 31, 2010. EPA
will publish a document in the Federal Register to remove the revoked
tolerances from the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
Section 408(l)(6) of FFDCA requires EPA to establish a time-limited
tolerance or exemption from the requirement for a tolerance for
pesticide chemical residues in food that will result from the use of a
pesticide under an emergency exemption granted by EPA under section 18
of FIFRA. Such tolerances can be established without providing notice
or period for public comment. EPA does not intend for its actions on
section 18 related tolerances to set binding precedents for the
application of the section 408 safety standard to other tolerances and
exemptions. Section 408(e) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a tolerance
or an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance on its own
initiative, i.e., without having received any petition from an outside
party.
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. . .
.''
Section 18 of the FIFRA authorizes EPA to exempt any Federal or
State agency from any provision of FIFRA, if EPA determines that
``emergency conditions exist which require such exemption.'' This
provision was not amended by the FQPA. EPA has established regulations
governing such emergency exemptions in 40 CFR part 166.
III. Emergency Exemption for Metconazole on Soybeans and FFDCA
Tolerances
Australasian soybean rust (SBR) is a plant disease caused by two
fungal species, Phakopsora pachyrhizi and P. meibomiae, and is spread
primarily by windborne spores that can be transported over long
distances. SBR models suggest that most of the soybean acreage in the
United States could be compromised by an SBR epidemic. In accordance
with the 2002 Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act, SBR was
identified by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) as a
select biological agent with the potential to pose a severe threat to
the soybean industry and livestock production, in general. As such,
USDA has invested in extensive readiness and outreach activities among
soybean producers. The States of Minnesota and South Dakota petitioned
EPA to allow under FIFRA section 18 the use of metconazole on soybeans
for control of SBR in Minnesota and South Dakota. After having reviewed
the submission, EPA concurs that emergency conditions exist for these
States.
As part of its assessment of this emergency exemption, EPA assessed
the potential risks presented by residues of metconazole in or on
aspirated grain fractions; egg; meat, fat and meat by-products of
cattle, goat, hog, horse, poultry and sheep; milk; soybean, hulls;
soybean, meal; soybean, refined oil; and soybean, seed. In doing so,
EPA considered the safety standard in section 408(b)(2) of FFDCA, and
EPA decided that the necessary tolerance under section 408(l)(6) of
FFDCA would be consistent with the safety standard and with FIFRA
section 18. Consistent with the need to move quickly on the emergency
exemption in order to address an urgent non-routine situation and to
ensure that the resulting food is safe and lawful, EPA is issuing these
tolerances without notice and opportunity for public comment as
provided in section 408(l)(6) of FFDCA. Although these tolerances will
expire and be revoked on December 31, 2010, under section 408(l)(5) of
FFDCA, residues of the pesticide not in excess of the amounts specified
in the tolerance remaining in or on aspirated grain fractions; egg;
meat, fat and meat by-products of cattle, goat, hog, horse, poultry and
sheep; milk; soybean, hulls; soybean, meal; soybean, refined oil; and
soybean, seed after that date will not be unlawful, provided the
pesticide is applied in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA, and the
residues do not exceed a level that was authorized by these tolerances
at the time of that application. EPA will take action to revoke these
tolerances earlier if any experience with, scientific data on, or other
relevant information on this pesticide indicate that the residues are
not safe.
Because these tolerances are being approved under emergency
conditions, EPA has not made any decisions about whether metconazole
meets EPA's registration requirements for use in soybeans or whether
permanent tolerances for this use would be appropriate. Under these
circumstances, EPA does not believe that these tolerances serve as a
basis for registration of metconazole by a State for special local
needs under FIFRA section 24(c). Nor do these tolerances serve as the
basis for growers in any State other than those in which State lead
agencies have obtained an exemption to use this pesticide on this crop
under section 18 of FIFRA without following all provisions of EPA's
regulations implementing FIFRA section 18 as identified in 40 CFR part
166. For additional information regarding the
[[Page 76192]]
emergency exemption for metconazole, contact the Agency's Registration
Division at the address provided under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the
regulatory requirements of section 408 of FFDCA and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/
fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
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
metconazole and to make a determination on aggregate exposure,
consistent with section 408(b)(2) of FFDCA, for time-limited tolerances
for residues of metconazole in or on aspirated grain fractions at 1.00
ppm; egg at 0.02 ppm; meat, fat and meat by-products of cattle, goat,
hog, horse, poultry and sheep at 0.02 ppm; milk at 0.02 ppm; soybean,
hulls at 1.20 ppm; soybean, meal at 0.25 ppm; soybean, refined oil at
1.20 ppm; and soybean, seed at 0.10 ppm. EPA's assessment of the
dietary exposures and risks associated with establishing these
tolerances follows.
A. Toxicological Endpoints
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 endpoint. 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. An UF of 100
is routinely used, 10x to account for interspecies differences and 10x
for intraspecies differences.
For dietary risk assessment (other than cancer), the Agency uses
the UF to calculate an acute or chronic reference dose (aRfD or cRfD)
where the RfD is equal to the NOAEL divided by the appropriate UF (RfD
= NOAEL/UF). Where an additional safety factor is retained due to
concerns unique to the FQPA, this additional factor is applied to the
RfD by dividing the RfD by such additional factor. The acute or chronic
Population Adjusted Dose (aPAD or cPAD) is a modification of the RfD to
accommodate this type of FQPA SF.
For non-dietary risk assessments (other than cancer) the UF is used
to determine the level of concern (LOC). For example, when 100 is the
appropriate UF (10x to account for interspecies differences and 10x for
intraspecies differences), the LOC is 100. To estimate risk, a ratio of
the NOAEL to exposures (margin of exposure (MOE) = NOAEL/exposure) is
calculated and compared to the LOC.
The linear default risk methodology (Q*) is the primary method
currently used by the Agency to quantify carcinogenic risk. The Q*
approach assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree
of cancer risk. A Q* is calculated and used to estimate risk which
represents a probability of occurrence of additional cancer cases
(e.g., risk is expressed as 1 x 10-\6\ or one in a million).
Under certain specific circumstances, MOE calculations will be used for
the carcinogenic risk assessment. In this non-linear approach, a
``point of departure'' is identified below which carcinogenic effects
are not expected. The point of departure is typically a NOAEL based on
an endpoint related to cancer effects though it may be a different
value derived from the dose response curve. To estimate risk, a ratio
of the point of departure to exposure (MOEcancer = point of
departure/exposures) is calculated. A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for metconazole used for human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit:
Table 1.--Summary of Toxicological Dose and Endpoints for Metconazole for Use in Human Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF and Level of
Exposure/Scenario Dose Used in Risk Concern for Risk Study and Toxicological
Assessment, UF Assessment Effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute Dietary (U.S. general Not applicable None An endpoint of concern
population including infants and (effect) attributable
children) to a single exposure
(dose) for the U.S.
general population was
not identified in the
oral toxicity studies
reviewed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute Dietary (Females 13-49 years of NOAEL = 12.0 milligram/ FQPA SF = 1x Developmental toxicity--
age) kilogram/day (mg/kg/ aPAD = acute RfD / FQPA rat; LOAEL = 30.0 mg/
day) SF = 0.12 mg/kg/day. kg/day based on
UF = 100x.............. increases in skeletal
Acute RfD = 0.12 mg/kg/ variations.
day.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic Dietary (All populations) NOAEL= 4.3 mg/kg/day FQPA SF = 1x Chronic oral toxicity -
UF = 100x.............. cPAD = chronic RfD / rat; LOAEL = 13.1 mg/
Chronic RfD = 0.04 mg/ FQPA SF = 0.04 mg/kg/ kg/day based on
kg/day. day. increased liver
weights and associated
hepatocellular lipid
vacuolation and
centrilobular
hypertrophy observed
in males. Similar
effects were observed
in females at 54 mg/kg/
day, plus increased
spleen weight.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short-Term Incidental Oral (1 to 30 NOAEL = 9.1 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 100 28-day oral toxicity -
days) UF = 100x rat; LOAEL = 90.5 mg/
kg/day based on
decreased body weight
gain in males,
increased liver and
kidney weight and
hepatocellular
hypertrophy and
vacuolation in both
sexes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 76193]]
Intermediate-Term Incidental Oral(1 NOAEL = 6.4 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 100 90-day oral toxicity--
to 6 months) UF =100 x rat; LOAEL = 19.2 mg/
kg/day based on
hepatic vacuolation in
males and increased
spleen weight in
females.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short-Term Dermal (1 to 30 days) NOAEL = 9.1 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 100 28-day oral toxicity--
UF = 100x (dermal rat; LOAEL = 90.5 mg/
absorption rate = 5%). kg/day based on
decreased body weight
gain in males,
increased liver and
kidney weight and
hepatocellular
hypertrophy and
vacuolation in both
sexes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intermediate-Term Dermal(1 to 6 NOAEL = 6.4 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 100 90-day oral toxicity--
months) UF = 100x (dermal rat; LOAEL = 19.2 mg/
absorption rate = 5%). kg/day based on
hepatic vacuolation in
males and increased
spleen weight in
females.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Long-Term Dermal (>6 months) NOAEL= 4.3 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 100 Chronic oral toxicity--
UF = 100x (dermal rat; LOAEL = 13.1 mg/
absorption rate = 5%). kg/day based on
increased liver
weights and associated
hepatocellular lipid
vacuolation and
centrilobular
hypertrophy observed
in males. Similar
effects were observed
in females at 54 mg/kg/
day, plus increased
spleen weight.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short-Term Inhalation (1 to 30 days) NOAEL= 9.1 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 100 28-day oral toxicity--
UF = 100x (inhalation- rat; LOAEL = 90.5 mg/
absorption rate = 100% kg/day based on
oral equivalent). decreased body weight
gain in males,
increased liver and
kidney weight and
hepatocellular
hypertrophy and
vacuolation in both
sexes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intermediate-Term Inhalation (1 to 6 NOAEL= 6.4 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 100 90-day oral toxicity--
months) UF = 100x (inhalation- rat; LOAEL = 19.2 mg/
absorption rate = 100% kg/day based on
oral equivalent). hepatic vacuolation in
males and increased
spleen weight in
females.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Long-Term Inhalation (>6 months) NOAEL= 4.3 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 100 Chronic oral toxicity--
UF = 100x (inhalation- rat; LOAEL = 13.1 mg/
absorption rate = 100% kg/day based on
oral equivalent). increased liver
weights and associated
hepatocellular lipid
vacuolation and
centrilobular
hypertrophy observed
in males. Similar
effects were observed
in females at 54 mg/kg/
day, plus increased
spleen weight.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation) Metconazole has been classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic in
humans.'' As a result, a quantified carcinogenic assessment (Q*
approach) is not required for metconazole.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. Metconazole is not
currently registered for any use in the United States. An import
tolerance has been established for metconazole on bananas. Risk
assessments were conducted by EPA to assess dietary exposures from
metconazole in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Acute dietary risk assessments are performed for
a food-use pesticide if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a one day
or single exposure. The Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with
the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID\TM\) analysis evaluated
the individual food consumption as reported by respondents in the USDA
1994-1996 and 1998 nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII) and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each
commodity.
The acute dietary exposure analysis for metconazole was conducted
for the proposed food use and drinking water. Except for drinking
water, the acute analysis is based on Tier 1 assumptions of the
proposed/recommended tolerance-level residues and 100% crop treated
(CT). A Tier 2 drinking water assessment for the proposed use in
soybeans was performed using the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure
Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS) model with index reservoir (IR)
scenarios and percent cropped area (PCA) adjustment factors. Estimated
concentrations of metconazole in drinking water (from use in soybeans)
were incorporated directly into the acute dietary risk assessment.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary risk
assessment, the DEEM-FCID\TM\ analysis evaluated the individual food
consumption as reported by respondents in the USDA 1994-1996 and 1998
nationwide CSFII and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each
commodity.
The chronic dietary exposure analysis for metconazole was conducted
for the proposed food use and drinking water. Except for drinking
water, the chronic analysis is based on Tier 1 assumptions of the
proposed/recommended tolerance-level residues and 100% CT. A Tier 2
drinking water assessment for the proposed use in soybeans was
performed using PRZM/EXAMS model with IR scenarios and PCA adjustment
[[Page 76194]]
factors. As with the acute analysis, estimated concentrations of
metconazole in drinking water (from use in soybeans) were incorporated
directly into the chronic dietary risk assessment.
As a result, all acute and chronic dietary risk estimates were less
than the Agency's LOC for the U.S. general population and all
population subgroups (i.e., they are all less than 100% of the aPAD and
cPAD).
iii. Cancer. Metconazole has been classified as ``not likely to be
carcinogenic in humans'' based on convincing evidence that carcinogenic
effects are not likely below a defined dose range. As a result, a
quantified carcinogenic assessment (Q* approach) is not required for
metconazole.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used the PRZM/
EXAMS to calculate estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) for
the use of metconazole in soybeans, using the IR scenarios and PCA
adjustment factors. Thus, the estimated exposure concentrations for
water are based on the proposed highest use rate. Ground water
concentrations were estimated with the Screening Concentration in
Ground Water (SCI-GROW) model.
A Tier 2 drinking water assessment was conducted for the proposed
use of metconazole in soybeans using the proposed maximum application
rate of 0.07 lbs. a.i./acre with 2 applications per year and a 10- to
21-day RTI. The preharvest interval (PHI) will be 30 days. Based on
PRZM/EXAMS, the EDWCs for metconazole in surface water are 1.57 parts
per billion (ppb) and 0.48 ppb for acute and chronic (non-cancer)
exposures, respectively. For chronic/cancer assessments, the 30-year
annual average from PRZM/EXAMS is 0.34 ppb. The EDWC for both acute and
chronic exposures is estimated as 0.04 ppb for ground water using the
SCI-GROW model.
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).
Metconazole 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 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.''
Metconazole is a member of the triazole-containing class of
pesticides. Although conazoles act similarly in plants (fungi) by
inhibiting ergosterol biosynthesis, there is not necessarily a
relationship between their pesticidal activity and their mechanism of
toxicity in mammals. Structural similarities do not constitute a common
mechanism of toxicity. Evidence is needed to establish that the
chemicals operate by the same, or essentially the same sequence of
major biochemical events (EPA, 2002). In conazoles, however, a variable
pattern of toxicological responses is found. Some are hepatotoxic and
hepatocarcinogenic in mice. Some induce thyroid tumors in rats. Some
induce developmental, reproductive, and neurological effects in
rodents. Furthermore, the conazoles produce a diverse range of
biochemical events including altered cholesterol levels, stress
responses, and altered DNA methylation). It is not clearly understood
whether these biochemical events are directly connected to their
toxicological outcomes. Thus, there is currently no evidence to
indicate that conazoles share common mechanisms of toxicity and EPA is
not following a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of
toxicity for the conazoles. For information regarding EPA's procedures
for cumulating effects from substances found to have a common mechanism
of toxicity, see EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative.
Metconazole is a triazole-derived pesticide. This class of
compounds can form the common metabolite 1,2,4-triazole and two
triazole conjugates (triazole alanine and triazole acetic acid). To
support existing tolerances and to establish new tolerances for
triazole-derivative pesticides, including metconazole, EPA conducted a
human health risk assessment for exposure to 1,2 4-triazole, triazole
alanine and triazole acetic acid resulting from the use of all current
and pending uses of triazole-derived fungicide. The risk assessment is
a highly conservative, screening-level evaluation in terms of hazards
associated with the common metabolites (e.g., use of maximum
combination of uncertainty factors) and potential dietary and non-
dietary exposures (i.e., high-end estimates of both dietary and non-
dietary exposures). In addition, the Agency retained the additional 10x
FQPA safety factor for the protection of infants and children. The
assessment includes evaluations of risks for various population
subgroups, including those comprised of infants and children. The
Agency's complete risk assessment is found in the propiconazole
reregistration docket at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0497-0013.
C. 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 pre- and/or post-natal
toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and exposure
unless EPA determines that a different margin of safety will be safe
for infants and children. Margins of safety are incorporated into EPA
risk assessments either directly through use of a MOE analysis or
through using uncertainty (safety) factors in calculating a dose level
that poses no appreciable risk to humans.
2. Developmental toxicity studies. Developmental studies in rats
and rabbits show some evidence of developmental effects (skeletal
variations, post-implantation loss, reduction in fetal body weight),
but only at dose levels that are maternally toxic. In the developmental
toxicity study in rats, skeletal variations (predominantly lumbar ribs)
occurred in the presence of maternal toxicity (decreased body weight
gains). In the pre-natal developmental toxicity study in rabbits,
developmental effects (increased post-implantation loss and reduced
fetal body weights) were observed at the same dose that caused maternal
toxicity (decreased body weight gains, reduced food consumption and
alterations in hematology parameters). In the 2-generation reproduction
study in rats with cis metconazole, offspring toxicity (reduced fetal
body weights in F1 and F2 offspring) were
observed only at the highest tested dose which also resulted in
evidence of parental toxicity (reduced parental body weight gains and
increased ovarian weight). The chemical is non-genotoxic and not likely
to be carcinogenic below a defined dose range based on bioassays in the
rat and the mouse combined with a lack of in vitro or in vivo
mutagenicity. Metconazole did not demonstrate the potential for
neurotoxicity in the four species (mouse, rat, dog and rabbit) tested.
NOAELs/LOAELs are well characterized and are used as endpoints for
appropriate risk assessments.
There are adequate data in the metconazole toxicology database to
characterize the potential for pre- and/or post-natal risks to infants
and children: a 2-generation reproduction study in rats (cis-only
isomer; one with
[[Page 76195]]
the cis/trans mixture has been completed and will be submitted in the
near future); a developmental study in rats; and several developmental
studies with rabbits. The effects seen in these studies do not suggest
that pups are more susceptible: pup effects were only seen in the
presence of maternal toxicity and, in general, were of comparable or
less severity to the effects observed in adults. Thus, there are no
residual uncertainties for pre- and/or post-natal exposure to
metconazole and the Agency has determined that the special FQPA safety
factor can be reduced to 1x.
3. Reproductive toxicity study. In the submitted 2-generation
reproduction study in rats with cis metconazole, offspring toxicity
(reduced fetal body weights in F1 and F2 offspring) was observed only
at the highest tested dose, which also resulted in evidence of parental
toxicity (reduced parental body weight gains and increased ovarian
weight). As discussed in Unit IV.C.2., there are no residual
uncertainties for pre- and/or post-natal exposure to metconazole.
4. Pre-natal and post-natal sensitivity. Please refer to the
explanation provided in Unit IV.C.2. for a detailed discussion
regarding ``pre- and/or post-natal sensitivity.''
5. Conclusion. The Agency evaluated the quality of the hazard and
exposure database for metconazole to characterize its potential for
pre- and/or post-natal risks to infants and children. The effects
observed in the developmental and reproductive studies do not suggest
that pups are more susceptible; pup effects were only seen in the
presence of maternal toxicity and, in general, were of comparable or
less severity to the effects observed in adults. Thus, based on the
hazard and exposure data, the special FQPA SF is reduced to 1x as there
are low concerns and no residual uncertainties with regard to pre- and/
or post-natal toxicity.
D. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA conducted human health risk assessments for acute, chronic and
cancer dietary exposures (food + drinking water only) for the proposed
use. Because there are no uses of metconazole that are expected to
result in residential exposures, this aggregate risk assessment takes
into consideration dietary (food + drinking water) exposure only;
therefore, the acute and chronic aggregate estimates would be the same
as the dietary exposure results.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit, the acute dietary exposure from food and water to metconazole
will occupy 1% of the aPAD for females 13-49 years old, the population
subgroup of concern. Given the proposed use, the Agency has no risk
concern for exposure to metconazole through food and/or drinking water.
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
metconazole from food and water will utilize 2% of the cPAD for the
U.S. general population and 5% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old.
There are no residential uses for metconazole that will result in
chronic residential exposure to metconazole. Given the proposed use,
the Agency has no risk concern for exposure to metconazole through food
and/or drinking water. EPA does not expect the aggregate exposure to
exceed 100% of the cPAD.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure
takes into account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and drinking water (considered to be a background exposure level).
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account non-dietary,
non-occupational exposure plus chronic exposure to food and drinking
water (considered to be a background exposure level). Since metconazole
is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential
exposure, short- and intermediate-term aggregate risk assessments are
not needed.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Metconazole is ``not
likely to be carcinogenic in humans'' based on convincing evidence that
carcinogenic effects are not likely below a defined dose range. A non-
genotoxic mode of action for mouse liver tumors was established. No
quantification is required.
5. Determination of safety. Based on all these considerations, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the U.S. general population and to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to metconazole residues.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An adequate enforcement methodology (example--gas chromatography)
is available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be
requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental
Science Center, 701 Mapes Road, Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone
number: (410) 305-2905; e-mail address: residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
No CODEX, Canadian or Mexican maximum residue limits (MRLs) or
tolerances have been established for metconazole in or on soybeans.
Further, no provisional MRL has been established in Japan for imported
soybeans. Therefore, international harmonization is not an issue at
this time.
VI. Conclusion
Therefore, time-limited tolerances are established for residues of
metconazole in or on aspirated grain fractions at 1.00 ppm; egg at 0.02
ppm; meat, fat and meat by-products of cattle, goat, hog, horse,
poultry and sheep at 0.02 ppm; milk at 0.02 ppm; soybean, hulls at 1.20
ppm; soybean, meal at 0.25 ppm; soybean, refined oil at 1.20 ppm; and
soybean, seed at 0.10 ppm.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes a time-limited tolerance under section
408 of FFDCA. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted
these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866,
entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993).
Because this rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order
12866 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or
contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). Nor
does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898,
entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994);
or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and
Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not
involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration
of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
[[Page 76196]]
(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 FIFRA
section 18 exemption under section 408 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: December 5, 2006.
Donald R. Stubbs,
Acting 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. Section 180.617 is amended by adding text and table to paragraph (b)
to read as follows:
Sec. 180.617 Metconazole; tolerances for residues.
* * * * *
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. Time-limited tolerances are
established for residues of the fungicide metconazole, 5-[(4-
chlorophenyl)methyl]-2,2-dimethyl-1-(1H -1,2,4-triazole-1-yl-
methyl)cyclopentanol in or on aspirated grain fractions; egg; meat, fat
and meat by-products of cattle, goat, hog, horse, poultry and sheep;
milk; soybean, hulls; soybean, meal; soybean, refined oil; and soybean,
seed in connection with the use of the pesticide under section 18
emergency exemptions granted by EPA. The tolerances will expire and be
revoked on the date specified in the following table.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expiration/
Commodity Parts per million revocation date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aspirated grain fractions......... 1.00 12/31/10
Cattle, fat....................... 0.02 12/31/10
Cattle, meat...................... 0.02 12/31/10
Cattle, meat byproducts........... 0.02 12/31/10
Egg............................... 0.02 12/31/10
Goat, fat......................... 0.02 12/31/10
Goat, meat........................ 0.02 12/31/10
Goat, meat byproducts............. 0.02 12/31/10
Hog, fat.......................... 0.02 12/31/10
Hog, meat......................... 0.02 12/31/10
Hog, meat byproducts.............. 0.02 12/31/10
Horse, fat........................ 0.02 12/31/10
Horse, meat....................... 0.02 12/31/10
Horse, meat byproducts............ 0.02 12/31/10
Milk.............................. 0.02 12/31/10
Poultry, fat...................... 0.02 12/31/10
Poultry, meat..................... 0.02 12/31/10
Poulty, meat byproducts........... 0.02 12/31/10
Sheep, fat........................ 0.02 12/31/10
Sheep, meat....................... 0.02 12/31/10
Sheep, meat byproducts............ 0.02 12/31/10
[[Page 76197]]
Soybean, hulls.................... 1.20 12/31/10
Soybean, meal..................... 0.25 12/31/10
Soybean, refined oil.............. 1.20 12/31/10
Soybean, seed..................... 0.10 12/31/10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E6-21493 Filed 12-19-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S