Fluthiacet-methyl; Pesticide Tolerance, 77620-77625 [E6-22126]
Download as PDF
77620
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
implications.’’ This direct final rule
does not have tribal implications, as
specified in Executive Order 13175.
Today’s direct final rule will affect only
those refiners, importers or blenders of
gasoline that choose to produce or
import RFG for sale in the East St. Louis
ozone nonattainment area, and gasoline
distributors and retail stations in those
areas. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health &
Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from
Environmental Health and Safety Risks,
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to
any rule that: (1) As determined to be
‘‘economically significant’’ as defined
under Executive Order 12866, and (2)
concerns an environmental health or
safety risk that EPA has reason to
believe may have a disproportionate
effect on children. If the regulatory
action meets both criteria, the Agency
must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on
children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by the
Agency.
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
as applying only to those regulatory
actions that are based on health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required
under section 5–501 of the Order has
the potential to influence the regulation.
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because it is not
economically significant.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply
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)] because it is
not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of Public Law 104–113,
the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA),
directs us to use voluntary consensus
standards in our regulatory activities
unless it would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are
technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices)
developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies. The
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
NTTAA directs us to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when we
decide not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus
standards. This direct final rulemaking
does not involve technical standards.
Therefore, EPA is not considering the
use of any voluntary consensus
standards.
J. Statutory Authority
The Statutory authority for the action
finalized today is granted to EPA by
sections 211(c) and (k) and 301 of the
Clean Air Act, as amended; 42 U.S.C.
7545(c) and (k) and 7601.
K. 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 the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule
will be effective May 1, 2007.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Fuel additives,
Gasoline, Motor vehicle pollution.
Dated: December 20, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
I
40 CFR part 80 is amended as follows:
PART 80—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 80
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7545, 7542, and
7601(a).
2. Section 80.70 is amended by adding
paragraph (k)(2) to read as follows:
I
§ 80.70
Covered areas.
*
*
*
*
*
(k) * * *
(2) The Illinois portion of the St.
Louis, MO–IL 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area is a covered area
beginning June 1, 2007. The
prohibitions of section 211(k)(5) of the
Clean Air Act apply to all persons other
than retailers and wholesale purchaserconsumers in the Illinois portion of the
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
St. Louis, MO–IL 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area beginning May 1,
2007. The prohibitions of section
211(k)(5) of the Clean Air Act apply to
retailers and wholesale purchaserconsumers in the Illinois portion of the
St. Louis, MO–IL 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area beginning June 1,
2007.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E6–22162 Filed 12–26–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0788; FRL–8108–8]
Fluthiacet-methyl; Pesticide Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a
tolerance for combined residues of
fluthiacet-methyl in or on cotton, gin
byproducts and cotton, undelinted seed.
K-I Chemical U.S.A. Inc. requested this
tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended
by the Food Quality Protection Act of
1996 (FQPA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 27, 2006. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 26, 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–2006–0788. All documents in the
docket are listed in the index for the
docket. 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 in the electronic docket at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400,
One Potomac Yard (South Building),
2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA.
The Docket Facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket
telephone number is (703) 305–5805.
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joanne I. Miller, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–6224; e-mail address:
miller.joanne@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to:
• Crop production (NAICS 111), e.g.,
agricultural workers; greenhouse,
nursery, and floriculture workers;
farmers.
• Animal production (NAICS 112),
e.g., cattle ranchers and farmers, dairy
cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
• Food manufacturing (NAICS 311),
e.g., agricultural workers; farmers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture
workers; ranchers; pesticide applicators.
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
32532), e.g., agricultural workers;
commercial applicators; farmers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture
workers; residential users.
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing
Request?
Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as
amended by the FQPA, any person may
file an objection to any aspect of this
regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. The EPA
procedural regulations which govern the
submission of objections and requests
for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178.
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–2006–0788 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 26, 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
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–2006–0788, by one of
the following methods:
• Federal e Rule making 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, Rm. S-4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S.
Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. 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
In the Federal Register of September
20, 2006 (71 FR 54987) (FRL–8094–7),
EPA issued a notice pursuant to section
408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 7F4821) by K-I
Chemical U.S.A. Inc., 11 Martine
Avenue, Suite 970, White Plains, NY
10606. The petition requested that 40
CFR 180.551 be amended by
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
77621
establishing a tolerance for combined
residues of the herbicide, fluthiacetmethyl, acetic acid, [[2-chloro-4-fluoro5-[(tetrahydro-3-oxo-1H,3H[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-a]pyridazin-1ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]-methyl
ester, and its acid metabolite, acetic
acid, [[2-chloro-4-fluoro-5-[(tetrahydro3-oxo-1H,3H-[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4a]pyridazin-1ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]-, in or on
the food/feed commodities: Cotton, gin
byproducts at 0.20 part per million
(ppm) and cotton, undelinted seed at
0.020 ppm. That notice included a
summary of the petition prepared by KI Chemical U.S.A. Inc., the registrant.
There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. . . .’’
EPA performs a number of analyses to
determine the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide residues. For
further discussion of the regulatory
requirements of section 408 of the
FFDCA and a complete description of
the risk assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/
November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other
relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess
the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure,
consistent with section 408(b)(2) of
FFDCA, for a tolerance for combined
residues of fluthiacet-methyl in or on
cotton, gin byproducts at 0.20 ppm and
cotton, undelinted seed at 0.020 ppm.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
77622
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
C. Exposure Assessment
associated with establishing the
tolerance follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children. Specific
information on the studies received and
the nature of the toxic effects caused by
fluthiacet-methyl as well as the noobserved-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL)
and the lowest-observed-adverse-effectlevel (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies
are discussed in the Federal Register of
December 21, 2001 (66 FR 65839) (FRL–
6806–7).
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold
below which there is no appreciable
risk, the dose at which no adverse
effects are observed (the NOAEL) from
the toxicology study identified as
appropriate for use in risk assessment is
used to estimate the toxicological level
of concern (LOC). However, the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL) is sometimes
used for risk assessment if no NOAEL
was achieved in the toxicology study
selected. An uncertainty factor (UF) is
applied to reflect uncertainties inherent
in the extrapolation from laboratory
animal data to humans and in the
variations in sensitivity among members
of the human population as well as
other unknowns. An UF or 100 is
routinely used, 10X to account for
interspecies differences and 10X for
intraspecies differences.
The linear default risk methodology
(Q*) is the primary method currently
used by the Agency to quantify nonthreshold hazards such as cancer. The
Q* approach assumes that any amount
of exposure will lead to some degree of
cancer risk, estimates risk in terms of
the probability of occurrence of
additional cancer cases. More
information can be found on the general
principles EPA uses in risk
characterization at https://www.epa.gov/
fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/
Day-26/p30948.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for fluthiacet-methyl used for
human risk assessment is discussed in
Unit III.B. of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of December 21,
2001 (66 FR 65839) (FRL–6806–7).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. Tolerances have been
established (40 CFR 180.551) for the
residues of fluthiacet-methyl, in or on a
variety of raw agricultural commodities.
Risk assessments were conducted by
EPA to assess dietary exposures from
fluthiacet-methyl in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide,
if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1–day or single
exposure.
No such effects were identified in the
toxicological studies for fluthiacetmethyl; therefore, a quantitative acute
dietary exposure assessment is
unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the Dietary Exposure
Evaluation Model software with the
Food Commodity Intake Database
(DEEM-FCIDTM), which incorporates
food consumption data 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
following assumptions were made for
the chronic exposure assessments:
Tolerance level residues were assumed
and refined with average values of
current and projected percent crop
treated (PCT) estimates. Refined current
PCT estimates for field corn, sweet corn
and soybeans were determined to be on
average <1% and at a maximum 1%;
and projected PCT estimates for cotton
were determined to be on average 30%
and at a maximum 34%.
iii. Cancer. The Hazard Identification
Assessment Review Committee
classified fluthiacet-methyl as likely to
be a human carcinogen.
Chronic and cancer exposure
assessement. Chronic and cancer
exposures were determined to be dietary
from residues in raw agricultural
commodities derived from the use of
fluthiacet-methyl for defoliating cotton
and from water. HED determined that
dietary exposure to residues of
fluthiacet-methyl and it acid metabolite
(CGA-300402) in or on cotton gin
byproducts at 0.20 ppm and in or on
cotton undelinted seed at 0.020 were
anticipated from the proposed usepattern. These tolerance level exposures
were used in the risk assessment. In
addition, Estimated Drinking Water
Concentrations (EDWCs) were
determined by modeling (PRZM/
EXAMS, Tier II) for California, the
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
highest found level of potential residues
for chronic (0.19 µg/L) and for cancer
(0.14 µg)
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. Section
408(b)(2)(E) of the FFDCA authorizes
EPA to use available data and
information on the anticipated residue
levels of pesticide residues in food and
the actual levels of pesticide chemicals
that have been measured in food. If EPA
relies on such information, EPA must
pursuant to section 408(f)(1) require that
data be provided 5 years after the
tolerance is established, modified, or
left in effect, demonstrating that the
levels in food are not above the levels
anticipated. Following the initial data
submission, EPA is authorized to
require similar data on a time frame it
deems appropriate. For the present
action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
for information relating to anticipated
residues as are required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized
under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Such
data call-ins will be required to be
submitted no later than 5 years from the
date of issuance of this tolerance.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states
that the Agency may use data on the
actual percent of food treated for
assessing chronic dietary risk only if the
Agency can make the following
findings: Condition 1, that the data used
are reliable and provide a valid basis to
show what percentage of the food
derived from such crop is likely to
contain such pesticide residue;
Condition 2, that the exposure estimate
does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group; and
Condition 3, if data are available on
pesticide use and food consumption in
a particular area, the exposure estimate
does not understate exposure for the
population in such area. In addition, the
Agency must provide for periodic
evaluation of any estimates used. To
provide for the periodic evaluation of
the estimate of PCT as required by
section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA, EPA may
require registrants to submit data on
PCT.
The Agency used PCT information as
follows: The assumptions of the dietary
exposure analysis were tolerance level
residues, modified by default processing
factors and percent crop treated (PCT)
data. The resulting chronic and cancer
dietary assessments were classified as
Tier 2 assessments and are considered
to be partially refined.
PCT information came from EPA’s
refined usage analysis. Refined current
PCT estimates for field corn, sweet corn
and soybeans were determined to be on
average <1%, and at a maximum 1%.
Projected PCT estimates for cotton were
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
determined to be on average, 30%, and
at a maximum 34%. Because the
estimated average PCTs for field corn,
sweet corn and soybeans were less than
1%, they were rounded up to 1% for use
in the chronic and cancer dietary
assessments. The estimated average PCT
for cotton was used for both the chronic
and cancer assessment. There were no
data on pop corn; therefore, 100% crop
treated defaults were used. Default
DEEM 7.81 processing factors were
applied to corn, field, syrup and corn,
field, syrup-babyfood. EPA concluded
that residues of fluthiacet-methyl and its
acid metabolite CGA-300403, were not
expected to accumulate in livestock
tissues; therefore, livestock commodities
were not factored into the dietary risk
assessment.
The Agency believes that the three
conditions listed in Unit IV.C.1. have
been met. With respect to Condition 1,
PCT estimates are derived from Federal
and private market survey data, which
are reliable and have a valid basis. The
Agency is reasonably certain that the
percentage of the food treated is not
likely to be an underestimation. As to
Conditions 2 and 3, regional
consumption information and
consumption information for significant
subpopulations are taken into account
through EPA’s computer-based model
for evaluating the exposure of
significant subpopulations including
several regional groups. Use of this
consumption information in EPA’s risk
assessment process ensures that EPA’s
exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant
subpopulation group and allows the
Agency to be reasonably certain that no
regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those
estimated by the Agency. Other than the
data available through national food
consumption surveys, EPA does not
have available information on the
regional consumption of food to which
fluthiacet-methyl may be applied in a
particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency lacks sufficient
monitoring exposure data to complete a
comprehensive dietary exposure
analysis and risk assessment for
fluthiacet-methyl in drinking water.
Because the Agency does not have
comprehensive monitoring data,
drinking water concentration estimates
are made by reliance on simulation or
modeling taking into account data on
the physical characteristics of fluthiacetmethyl. Further information regarding
EPA drinking water models used in
pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed/
models/water/index.htm.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System and Sreening Concentrations in
Groundwater models, the estimated
environmental concentrations (EECs) of
fluthiacet-methyl for acute exposures
are estimated to be between 0.23 and 1.0
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water
and 0.08 ppb for ground water. The
EECs for chronic and cancer exposures
are estimated to be 0.19 and 0.l4,
respectively.
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).
Fluthiacet-methyl is not registered for
use on any sites that would result in
residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
Unlike other pesticides for which EPA
has followed a cumulative risk approach
based on a common mechanism of
toxicity, EPA has not made a common
mechanism of toxicity finding as to
fluthiacet-methyl and any other
substances and fluthiacet-methyl does
not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has not assumed that
fluthiacet-methyl has a common
mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding
EPA’s efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism
of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals,
see the policy statements released by
EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs
concerning common mechanism
determinations and procedures for
cumulating effects from substances
found to have a common mechanism on
EPA’s website at https://www.epa.gov/
pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA
provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold margin of safety for
infants and children in the case of
threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the data base on
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
77623
toxicity and exposure unless EPA
determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for
infants and children. Margins of safety
are incorporated into EPA risk
assessments either directly through use
of a MOE analysis or through using
uncertainty (safety) factors in
calculating a dose level that poses no
appreciable risk to humans. In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X when reliable data
do not support the choice of a different
factor, or, if reliable data are available,
EPA uses a different additional safety
factor value based on the use of
traditional uncertainty factors and/or
special FQPA safety factors, as
appropriate.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There is no quantitative or qualitative
evidence or increased susceptibility of
rat and rabbit fetuses to in utero
exposure to fluthiacet-methyl in
developmental toxicity studies. There is
no quantitative or qualitative evidence
of increased susceptibility to fluthiacetmethyl following prenatal/postnatal
exposure to a 2–generation reproduction
study.
3. Conclusion. EPA concluded based
on reliable data that it would be safe to
remove the additional 10X safety factor
for the protection of infants and
children. This conclusion was based on
the following findings:
i. There is no quantitative or
qualitative evidence of increased
susceptibility to fluthiacet-methyl
following prenatal/postnatal exposure;
ii. There is no concern for
developmental neurotoxicity resulting
from exposure to fluthiacet-methyl. A
developmental neurotoxicity study is
not required;
iii. The toxicological data base is
complete for FQPA assessment;
iv. The chronic dietary food exposure
assessment utilizes tolerance level
residues and 34% of cotton and 1%
corn and soybean crop treated
information for all commodities. By
using these screening-level residue
values and conservative percent crop
treated assessment, actual exposures/
risks will not be underestimated; and
v. The dietary drinking water
assessment utilizes water concentration
values generated by model and
associated modeling parameters that are
designed to provide conservative, health
protective, high-end estimates of water
concentrations that will not likely be
exceeded.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
1. Acute risk. An effect of concern
attributable to a single exposure (dose)
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
77624
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
was not identified from the oral toxicity
studies including the developmental
toxicity studies in rat and rabbits. No
acute risk is expected from exposure to
fluthiacet-methyl.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that exposure to fluthiacet-methyl from
food will utilize <1% of the cPAD for
the U.S. population, 1.4% of the cPAD
for all infant <1 year old. There are no
residential uses for fluthiacet-methyl
that results in chronic residential
exposure to fluthiacet-methyl.
3. Short-term risk. Fluthiacet-methyl
is not registered for use on any sites that
would result in residential exposure.
Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum
of the risk from food and water, which
do not exceed the Agency’s level of
concern.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. The overall cancer dietary
risk for the U.S. population is 7.51 x
10-7, based on dietary (food and
drinking water exposures).
5. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, and to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to fluthiacetmethyl residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(gas chromatography/mass spectrometry
method which uses negative ion
chemical ionization (GC/NCI-MS) is
available to enforce the tolerance
expression. The method may be
requested from: Chief, Analytical
Chemistry Branch, Environmental
Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft.
Meade, MD 20755–5350; telephone
number: (410) 305–2905; e-mail address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
There are no Codex, Canadian or
Mexican maximum residue limits
established for fluthiacet-methyl on
corn, cotton and soybean commodities
or on meat and milk commodities.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, the tolerance is established
for combined residues of Fluthiacetmethyl, acetic acid, [[2-chloro-4-fluoro5-[(tetrahydro-3-oxo-1H,3H[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-a]pyridazin-1ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]-methyl
ester, and its acid metabolite, acetic
acid, [[2-chloro-4-fluoro-5-[(tetrahydro3-oxo-1H,3H-[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4a]pyridazin-1-
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]-, in or on
cotton, gin byproducts at 0.20 ppm and
cotton, undelinted seed at 0.020 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes a tolerance
under section 408(d) of FFDCA in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory
Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this rule has
been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of
significance, this rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This final rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any
enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public
Law 104–4). Nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive
Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994); or OMB review or any Agency
action under Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since
tolerances and exemptions that are
established on the basis of a petition
under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply. In addition, the
Agency has determined that this action
will not have a substantial direct effect
on States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Executive Order 13132 requires
EPA to develop an accountable process
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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.
VII. 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
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
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 19, 2006.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—AMENDED
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
Final rule, announcement of
effective date.
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) received Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
approval on December 12, 2006 for new
public information collection
requirements contained in the FCC’s
Communications Assistance for Law
Enforcement Act and Broadband Access
and Services, Second Report and Order
and Memorandum Opinion and Order
(CALEA Second Report and Order) in 71
FR 38091, July 5, 2006, OMB Control
Number 3060–0809, pursuant to the
requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–
13. An agency may not conduct or
sponsor and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid
control number.
I
2. Section 180.551 is amended by
redesignating existing paragraph (a) as
(a)(1), and adding paragraph (a)(2) to
read as follows.
DATES:
§ 180.551 Fluthiacet-methyl; tolerances for
residues.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
(a) General. (1) * * *
(2) A tolerance is established for the
combined residues of the herbicide
fluthiacet-methyland its acid metabolite:
acetic acid, [[2-chloro-4-fluoro-5[tetrahydro-3-oxo-1H,3H[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-a]pyridazin-1ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]-methyl
ester, and its acid metabolite, acetic
acid, [[2-chloro-4-fluoro-5-[(tetrahydro3-oxo-1H,3H-[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4a]pyridazin-1ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]- , in or on
the following food commodities:
The rules for §§ 1.20004 and
1.20005 published at 71 FR 38091, July
5, 2006, are effective December 12,
2006.
Thomas J. Beers, Public Safety and
Homeland Security Bureau, Policy
Division, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554, at (202) 418–
0952.
For additional information concerning
the Paperwork Reduction Act
information collection requirements,
contact Judith B. Herman at (202) 418–
0124, or via the Internet at JudithB.Herman@fcc.gov.
The
CALEA Second Report and Order noted
that the effective date for the new
CALEA information collection
Parts per
requirements was subject to Office of
Commodity
million
Management and Budget (OMB)
approval. OMB granted its approval on
Cotton, gin byproducts .............
0.20
December 12, 2006. Accordingly, (1) an
Cotton undelinted seed ............
0.020
attesting letter for pending CALEA
section 107(c)(1) petitions currently on
*
*
*
*
*
file with the FCC must be filed by
[FR Doc. E6–22126 Filed 12–26–06; 8:45 am]
February 12, 2007; (2) compliance
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
monitoring reports (FCC Form 445)
must be filed by February 12, 2007; (3)
system security and integrity (SSI) plans
for providers of facilities-based
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
broadband internet access and
COMMISSION
interconnected Voice over Internet
Protocol (VoIP) services must be filed by
47 CFR Part 1
March 12, 2007.1
[ET Docket No. 04–295; FCC 06–56]
Compliance with new CALEA section
107(c) and 109(b) petition filing
Communications Assistance for Law
Enforcement Act and Broadband
1 Communications Assistance for Law
Access and Services
Enforcement Act and Broadband Access and
Federal Communications
Commission.
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Services, ET Docket No. 04–295, Public Notice DA
O6–2511, Public Notice DA 06–2512, and Public
Notice DA 06–2513.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
77625
requirements 2 became effective upon
OMB authorization, i.e., December 12,
2006.
CALEA requires the FCC to create
rules that regulate the conduct and
recordkeeping of lawful electronic
surveillance. On May 12, 2006, the FCC
released its CALEA Second Report and
Order which became effective August 4,
2006, except for certain information
collections which required OMB
approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act before the FCC could
enforce them. Now that OMB approval
has been granted:
(a) Each provider that has a CALEA
section 107(c)(1) extension petition
currently on file must submit to the FCC
an attesting letter documenting that the
provider’s equipment, facility or service
continues to qualify for compliance
extension relief, given that CALEA
section 107(c)(1) applies only to
equipment, facilities, or services
installed or deployed prior to October
25, 1998.
(b) Facilities-based broadband
Internet access and interconnected VoIP
service providers must file system
security and integrity (SSI) plans under
the Commission’s rules. SSI plans are
currently approved under the existing
OMB 3060–0809 information
collection.3
(c) All providers of facilities-based
broadband Internet access or
interconnected VoIP services must file
monitoring reports on FCC Form 445,
‘‘CALEA Monitoring Report for
Broadband and VoIP Services,’’ with the
FCC to ensure timely CALEA
compliance.
(d) There are new requirements
governing petitions filed under section
107(c)(1), which request additional time
to comply with CALEA; these
provisions apply to all providers subject
to CALEA and are voluntary filings.
(e) There are modified requirements
governing petitions filed under section
109(b) request for reimbursement of
CALEA; these provisions apply to all
providers subject to CALEA and are
voluntary filings.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–22155 Filed 12–26–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
2 See Communications Assistance for Law
Enforcement Act and Broadband Access and
Services, ET Docket No. 04–295, Second Report and
Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order, 21
FCC Rcd 5360 (2006), Appendices E and F.
3 See 65 FR 8666 (2000).
E:\FR\FM\27DER1.SGM
27DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 248 (Wednesday, December 27, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 77620-77625]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-22126]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0788; FRL-8108-8]
Fluthiacet-methyl; Pesticide Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a tolerance for combined residues
of fluthiacet-methyl in or on cotton, gin byproducts and cotton,
undelinted seed. K-I Chemical U.S.A. Inc. requested this tolerance
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by
the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA).
DATES: This regulation is effective December 27, 2006. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 26, 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-2006-0788. All documents in the
docket are listed in the index for the docket. 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 in the electronic docket at https://www.regulations.gov, or,
if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in
Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive,
Arlington, VA. The Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone
number is (703) 305-5805.
[[Page 77621]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joanne I. Miller, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number: (703) 305-6224; e-mail address:
miller.joanne@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
Crop production (NAICS 111), e.g., agricultural workers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers.
Animal production (NAICS 112), e.g., cattle ranchers and
farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
Food manufacturing (NAICS 311), e.g., agricultural
workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers;
ranchers; pesticide applicators.
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 32532), e.g., agricultural
workers; commercial applicators; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and
floriculture workers; residential users.
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document?
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 the FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any
person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may
also request a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural
regulations which govern the submission of objections and requests for
hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. 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-2006-0788 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 26, 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 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-2006-0788, by one of the following methods:
Federal e Rule making 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, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. 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
In the Federal Register of September 20, 2006 (71 FR 54987) (FRL-
8094-7), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
7F4821) by K-I Chemical U.S.A. Inc., 11 Martine Avenue, Suite 970,
White Plains, NY 10606. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.551 be
amended by establishing a tolerance for combined residues of the
herbicide, fluthiacet-methyl, acetic acid, [[2-chloro-4-fluoro-5-
[(tetrahydro-3-oxo-1H,3H-[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-[alpha]]pyridazin-1-
ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]-methyl ester, and its acid metabolite,
acetic acid, [[2-chloro-4-fluoro-5-[(tetrahydro-3-oxo-1H,3H-
[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-[alpha]]pyridazin-1-ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]-,
in or on the food/feed commodities: Cotton, gin byproducts at 0.20 part
per million (ppm) and cotton, undelinted seed at 0.020 ppm. That notice
included a summary of the petition prepared by K-I Chemical U.S.A.
Inc., the registrant. There were no comments received in response to
the notice of filing.
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the
regulatory requirements of section 408 of the FFDCA and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure, consistent with section
408(b)(2) of FFDCA, for a tolerance for combined residues of
fluthiacet-methyl in or on cotton, gin byproducts at 0.20 ppm and
cotton, undelinted seed at 0.020 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and
risks
[[Page 77622]]
associated with establishing the tolerance follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the toxic effects caused by fluthiacet-methyl as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in the
Federal Register of December 21, 2001 (66 FR 65839) (FRL-6806-7).
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the dose at which no adverse effects are observed
(the NOAEL) from the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use
in risk assessment is used to estimate the toxicological level of
concern (LOC). However, the lowest dose at which adverse effects of
concern are identified (the LOAEL) is sometimes used for risk
assessment if no NOAEL was achieved in the toxicology study selected.
An uncertainty factor (UF) is applied to reflect uncertainties inherent
in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and in the
variations in sensitivity among members of the human population as well
as other unknowns. An UF or 100 is routinely used, 10X to account for
interspecies differences and 10X for intraspecies differences.
The linear default risk methodology (Q*) is the primary method
currently used by the Agency to quantify non-threshold hazards such as
cancer. The Q* approach assumes that any amount of exposure will lead
to some degree of cancer risk, estimates risk in terms of the
probability of occurrence of additional cancer cases. More information
can be found on the general principles EPA uses in risk
characterization at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for fluthiacet-methyl used
for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of December 21, 2001 (66 FR 65839)
(FRL-6806-7).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. Tolerances have been
established (40 CFR 180.551) for the residues of fluthiacet-methyl, in
or on a variety of raw agricultural commodities. Risk assessments were
conducted by EPA to assess dietary exposures from fluthiacet-methyl in
food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for
fluthiacet-methyl; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with
the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID\TM\), which incorporates
food consumption data as reported by respondents in the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals
(CSFII), and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity.
The following assumptions were made for the chronic exposure
assessments: Tolerance level residues were assumed and refined with
average values of current and projected percent crop treated (PCT)
estimates. Refined current PCT estimates for field corn, sweet corn and
soybeans were determined to be on average <1% and at a maximum 1%; and
projected PCT estimates for cotton were determined to be on average 30%
and at a maximum 34%.
iii. Cancer. The Hazard Identification Assessment Review Committee
classified fluthiacet-methyl as likely to be a human carcinogen.
Chronic and cancer exposure assessement. Chronic and cancer
exposures were determined to be dietary from residues in raw
agricultural commodities derived from the use of fluthiacet-methyl for
defoliating cotton and from water. HED determined that dietary exposure
to residues of fluthiacet-methyl and it acid metabolite (CGA-300402) in
or on cotton gin byproducts at 0.20 ppm and in or on cotton undelinted
seed at 0.020 were anticipated from the proposed use-pattern. These
tolerance level exposures were used in the risk assessment. In
addition, Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWCs) were
determined by modeling (PRZM/EXAMS, Tier II) for California, the
highest found level of potential residues for chronic (0.19 [mu]g/L)
and for cancer (0.14 [mu]g)
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of the FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data
and information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues
in food and the actual levels of pesticide chemicals that have been
measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must pursuant
to section 408(f)(1) require that data be provided 5 years after the
tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect, demonstrating
that the levels in food are not above the levels anticipated. Following
the initial data submission, EPA is authorized to require similar data
on a time frame it deems appropriate. For the present action, EPA will
issue such data call-ins for information relating to anticipated
residues as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized
under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Such data call-ins will be required to
be submitted no later than 5 years from the date of issuance of this
tolerance.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary
risk only if the Agency can make the following findings: Condition 1,
that the data used are reliable and provide a valid basis to show what
percentage of the food derived from such crop is likely to contain such
pesticide residue; Condition 2, that the exposure estimate does not
underestimate exposure for any significant subpopulation group; and
Condition 3, if data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area. In addition, the
Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any estimates used. To
provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate of PCT as required
by section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA, EPA may require registrants to submit
data on PCT.
The Agency used PCT information as follows: The assumptions of the
dietary exposure analysis were tolerance level residues, modified by
default processing factors and percent crop treated (PCT) data. The
resulting chronic and cancer dietary assessments were classified as
Tier 2 assessments and are considered to be partially refined.
PCT information came from EPA's refined usage analysis. Refined
current PCT estimates for field corn, sweet corn and soybeans were
determined to be on average <1%, and at a maximum 1%. Projected PCT
estimates for cotton were
[[Page 77623]]
determined to be on average, 30%, and at a maximum 34%. Because the
estimated average PCTs for field corn, sweet corn and soybeans were
less than 1%, they were rounded up to 1% for use in the chronic and
cancer dietary assessments. The estimated average PCT for cotton was
used for both the chronic and cancer assessment. There were no data on
pop corn; therefore, 100% crop treated defaults were used. Default DEEM
7.81 processing factors were applied to corn, field, syrup and corn,
field, syrup-babyfood. EPA concluded that residues of fluthiacet-methyl
and its acid metabolite CGA-300403, were not expected to accumulate in
livestock tissues; therefore, livestock commodities were not factored
into the dietary risk assessment.
The Agency believes that the three conditions listed in Unit
IV.C.1. have been met. With respect to Condition 1, PCT estimates are
derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are reliable
and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that the
percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an underestimation.
As to Conditions 2 and 3, regional consumption information and
consumption information for significant subpopulations are taken into
account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating the exposure
of significant subpopulations including several regional groups. Use of
this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment process ensures
that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency to be reasonably
certain that no regional population is exposed to residue levels higher
than those estimated by the Agency. Other than the data available
through national food consumption surveys, EPA does not have available
information on the regional consumption of food to which fluthiacet-
methyl may be applied in a particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency lacks
sufficient monitoring exposure data to complete a comprehensive dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment for fluthiacet-methyl in drinking
water. Because the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data,
drinking water concentration estimates are made by reliance on
simulation or modeling taking into account data on the physical
characteristics of fluthiacet-methyl. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System and Sreening Concentrations in Groundwater models, the estimated
environmental concentrations (EECs) of fluthiacet-methyl for acute
exposures are estimated to be between 0.23 and 1.0 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 0.08 ppb for ground water. The EECs for
chronic and cancer exposures are estimated to be 0.19 and 0.l4,
respectively.
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). Fluthiacet-methyl is
not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential
exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative
risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to fluthiacet-methyl and any
other substances and fluthiacet-methyl does not appear to produce a
toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that fluthiacet-methyl
has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of
such chemicals, see the policy statements released by EPA's Office of
Pesticide Programs concerning common mechanism determinations and
procedures for cumulating effects from substances found to have a
common mechanism on EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the data base on toxicity and exposure
unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of
safety will be safe for infants and children. Margins of safety are
incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly through use of a
MOE analysis or through using uncertainty (safety) factors in
calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable risk to humans. In
applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X
when reliable data do not support the choice of a different factor, or,
if reliable data are available, EPA uses a different additional safety
factor value based on the use of traditional uncertainty factors and/or
special FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no quantitative or
qualitative evidence or increased susceptibility of rat and rabbit
fetuses to in utero exposure to fluthiacet-methyl in developmental
toxicity studies. There is no quantitative or qualitative evidence of
increased susceptibility to fluthiacet-methyl following prenatal/
postnatal exposure to a 2-generation reproduction study.
3. Conclusion. EPA concluded based on reliable data that it would
be safe to remove the additional 10X safety factor for the protection
of infants and children. This conclusion was based on the following
findings:
i. There is no quantitative or qualitative evidence of increased
susceptibility to fluthiacet-methyl following prenatal/postnatal
exposure;
ii. There is no concern for developmental neurotoxicity resulting
from exposure to fluthiacet-methyl. A developmental neurotoxicity study
is not required;
iii. The toxicological data base is complete for FQPA assessment;
iv. The chronic dietary food exposure assessment utilizes tolerance
level residues and 34% of cotton and 1% corn and soybean crop treated
information for all commodities. By using these screening-level residue
values and conservative percent crop treated assessment, actual
exposures/risks will not be underestimated; and
v. The dietary drinking water assessment utilizes water
concentration values generated by model and associated modeling
parameters that are designed to provide conservative, health
protective, high-end estimates of water concentrations that will not
likely be exceeded.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
1. Acute risk. An effect of concern attributable to a single
exposure (dose)
[[Page 77624]]
was not identified from the oral toxicity studies including the
developmental toxicity studies in rat and rabbits. No acute risk is
expected from exposure to fluthiacet-methyl.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to
fluthiacet-methyl from food will utilize <1% of the cPAD for the U.S.
population, 1.4% of the cPAD for all infant <1 year old. There are no
residential uses for fluthiacet-methyl that results in chronic
residential exposure to fluthiacet-methyl.
3. Short-term risk. Fluthiacet-methyl is not registered for use on
any sites that would result in residential exposure. Therefore, the
aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from food and water, which do not
exceed the Agency's level of concern.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. The overall cancer
dietary risk for the U.S. population is 7.51 x 10-7, based
on dietary (food and drinking water exposures).
5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, and to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to fluthiacet-methyl residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (gas chromatography/mass
spectrometry method which uses negative ion chemical ionization (GC/
NCI-MS) is available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method
may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350;
telephone number: (410) 305-2905; e-mail address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
There are no Codex, Canadian or Mexican maximum residue limits
established for fluthiacet-methyl on corn, cotton and soybean
commodities or on meat and milk commodities.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, the tolerance is established for combined residues of
Fluthiacet-methyl, acetic acid, [[2-chloro-4-fluoro-5-[(tetrahydro-3-
oxo-1H,3H-[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-[alpha]]pyridazin-1-
ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]-methyl ester, and its acid metabolite,
acetic acid, [[2-chloro-4-fluoro-5-[(tetrahydro-3-oxo-1H,3H-
[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-[alpha]]pyridazin-1-ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]-,
in or on cotton, gin byproducts at 0.20 ppm and cotton, undelinted seed
at 0.020 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of
significance, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This final rule does
not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose
any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law
104-4). Nor does it require any special considerations under Executive
Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice
in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994); or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive
Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does
not involve any technical standards that would require Agency
consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since
tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a
petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply. In addition, the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that 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.
VII. 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
[[Page 77625]]
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 19, 2006.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--AMENDED
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. Section 180.551 is amended by redesignating existing paragraph (a)
as (a)(1), and adding paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows.
Sec. 180.551 Fluthiacet-methyl; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. (1) * * *
(2) A tolerance is established for the combined residues of the
herbicide fluthiacet-methyland its acid metabolite: acetic acid, [[2-
chloro-4-fluoro-5-[tetrahydro-3-oxo-1H,3H-[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-
[alpha]]pyridazin-1-ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]-methyl ester, and its
acid metabolite, acetic acid, [[2-chloro-4-fluoro-5-[(tetrahydro-3-oxo-
1H,3H-[1,3,4]thiadiazolo[3,4-[alpha]]pyridazin-1-
ylidene)amino]phenyl]thio]- , in or on the following food commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cotton, gin byproducts..................................... 0.20
Cotton undelinted seed..................................... 0.020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E6-22126 Filed 12-26-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S