Imidacloprid; Pesticide Tolerance, 33907-33913 [E7-11792]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 20, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E7–11797 Filed 6–19–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2006–0968; FRL–8135–5]
Imidacloprid; Pesticide Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for combined residues of
imidacloprid and its metabolites
containing the 6-chloropyridinyl
moiety, all expressed as the parent, in
or on peanut, peanut hay and peanut
meal; pearl millet grain, forage, hay and
straw; proso millet grain, forage, hay
and straw; kava roots and leaves;
raspberry, wild; soybean forage and hay;
and aspirated grain fractions. It also
amends existing tolerances for
combined residues of imidacloprid and
its metabolites containing the 6chloropyridinyl moiety in or on
caneberry subgroup 13-A and soybean
seed. Bayer CropScience LLC and
Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR4) requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA). This regulation also corrects a
typographical error in the commodity
term for the existing tolerance on the
herbs subgroup, fresh herbs.
DATES: This regulation is effective June
20, 2007. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
August 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).
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2006–0968. To access the
electronic docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, select ‘‘Advanced
Search,’’ then ‘‘Docket Search.’’ Insert
the docket ID number where indicated
and select the ‘‘Submit’’ button. Follow
the instructions on the regulations.gov
web site to view the docket index or
access available documents. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the docket index available in
regulations.gov. 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.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:14 Jun 19, 2007
Jkt 211001
33907
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 Bldg.),
2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket
Facility telephone number is (703) 305–
5805.
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 EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s pilot
e-CFR site at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/
ecfr.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing
Request?
Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA,
any person may file an objection to any
aspect of this regulation and may also
request a hearing on those objections.
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–2006–0968 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
as required by 40 CFR part 178 on or
before August 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
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 this copy,
identified by docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPP–2006–0968, 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, Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., 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 Facility telephone number is
(703) 305–5805.
Barbara Madden, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–6463; e-mail address:
madden.barbara@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 those engaged in the
following activities:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111),
e.g., agricultural workers; greenhouse,
nursery, and floriculture workers;
farmers.
• Animal production (NAICS code
112), e.g., cattle ranchers and farmers,
dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311), e.g., agricultural workers; farmers;
greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture
workers; ranchers; pesticide applicators.
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 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 to provide 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
33908
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 20, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
II. Petition for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of December
20, 2006 (71 FR 76321) (FRL–8104–4),
EPA issued a notice pursuant to section
408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of
pesticide petitions (PP 6E7108 and PP
6E7116) by Interregional Research
Project No. 4 (IR-4), 681 U.S. Highway
No. 1 South, North Brunswick, NJ
08902–3390. The petitions requested
that 40 CFR 180.472 be amended by
establishing tolerances for combined
residues of the insecticide imidacloprid,
1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-Nnitro-2-imidazolidinimine, and its
metabolites containing the 6chloropyridinyl moiety, all expressed as
imidacloprid, in or on peanut at 0.45
parts per million (ppm); peanut, hay at
70 ppm; peanut, meal at 0.9 ppm; kava,
roots at 0.4 ppm; kava, leaves at 4.0
ppm; millet, pearl, grain at 0.05 ppm;
millet, proso, grain at 0.05 ppm; and oat,
grain at 0.05 (all requested in PP
6E7116); and on caneberry subgroup
13A and raspberry, wild at 2.5 ppm
(requested in PP 6E7108). That notice
included summaries of the petitions
prepared by IR-4, which are available to
the public in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
In the Federal Register of July 14,
2006 (71 FR 40099) (FRL–8060–4), 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 6F7049) by Bayer
CropScience LLC, 2 T. W. Alexander
Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC
27709. The petition requested that 40
CFR 180.472 be amended by
establishing tolerances for combined
residues of the insecticide imidacloprid,
1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-Nnitro-2-imidazolidinimine, and its
metabolites containing the 6chloropyridinyl moiety, all expressed as
imidacloprid, in or on soybean,
aspirated grain fractions at 240.0 parts
per million (ppm); soybean, forage at 8.0
ppm; soybean, hay at 30.0 ppm; and
soybean, seed at 1.6 ppm. That notice
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Bayer CropScience LLC, the
registrant, which is available to the
public in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petitions, EPA has
modified the proposed tolerances. The
modifications and reasons for these
changes are explained in Unit V.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:14 Jun 19, 2007
Jkt 211001
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of the 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 the FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of the FFDCA requires EPA
to give special consideration to
exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in
establishing a tolerance and to ‘‘ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue. . . .’’ These
provisions were added to the FFDCA by
the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA)
of 1996.
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in
section 408(b)(2)(D), 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 for
the petitioned-for tolerances for
combined residues of imidacloprid, 1[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-N-nitro2- imidazolidinimine, and its
metabolites containing the 6chloropyridinyl moiety, all expressed as
the parent, in or on peanut at 0.45 ppm;
peanut, hay at 35 ppm; peanut, meal at
0.75 ppm; millet, proso, grain at 0.05
ppm; millet, proso, forage at 2.0 ppm;
millet, proso, hay at 6.0 ppm; millet,
proso, straw at 3.0 ppm; millet, pearl,
grain at 0.05 ppm; millet, pearl, forage
at 2.0 ppm; millet, pearl, hay at 6.0
ppm; millet, pearl, straw at 3.0 ppm;
kava, roots at 0.40 ppm; kava, leaves at
4.0 ppm; caneberry, subgroup 13-A at
2.5 ppm; raspberry, wild at 2.5 ppm;
soybean, seed at 3.5 ppm; soybean,
forage at 8.0 ppm; soybean hay at 35
ppm and aspirated grain fractions at 240
ppm. EPA’s assessment of exposures
and risks associated with establishing
the tolerance follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 adverse effects caused
by imidacloprid as well as the noobserved-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL)
and the lowest-observed-adverse-effectlevel (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies
are discussed in the final rule published
in the Federal Register of June 13, 2003
(68 FR 35303), (FRL–7310–8); available
at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPAPEST/2003/June/Day-13/p14880.htm.
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold
below which there is no appreciable
risk, the toxicological level of concern
(LOC) is derived from the highest dose
at which the NOAEL in the toxicology
study identified as appropriate for use
in risk assessment. However, if a
NOAEL cannot be determined, the
LOAEL of concern are identified is
sometimes used for risk assessment.
Uncertainty/safety factors (UF) are used
in conjunction with the LOC to take into
account 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. Safety is assessed for acute
and chronic risks by comparing
aggregate exposure to the pesticide to
the acute population adjusted dose
(aPAD) and chronic population adjusted
dose (cPAD). The aPAD and cPAD are
calculated by dividing the LOC by all
applicable uncertainty/safety factors.
Short-term, intermediate-term, and longterm risks are evaluated by comparing
aggregate exposure to the LOC to ensure
that the margin of exposure (MOE)
called for by the product of all
applicable uncertainty/safety factors is
not exceeded.
For non-threshold risks, the Agency
assumes that any amount of exposure
will lead to some degree of risk and
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of occurrence of additional adverse
cases. Generally, cancer risks are
considered non-threshold. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/
November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for imidacloprid used for
human risk assessment is discussed in
Unit III.B. of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of June 13, 2003
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 20, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
(68 FR 35303), (FRL–7310–8); available
at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPAPEST/2003/June/Day-13/p14880.htm.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to imidacloprid, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing imidacloprid tolerances in 40
CFR 180.472. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from imidacloprid 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. In estimating acute dietary
exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1994–1996, and 1998 Nationwide
Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels
in food, EPA assumed all foods for
which there are tolerances were treated
and contain tolerance-level residues.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA 1994–1996, and 1998
Nationwide CSFII. As to residues in
food, EPA assumed tolerance-level
residues for all registered and proposed
commodities. EPA relied on percent
crop treated (PCT) information for some
registered commodities but assumed
100 PCT for all proposed new uses.
iii. Cancer. An exposure assessment
related to cancer risk is unnecessary.
The Agency has classified imidacloprid
as a ‘‘Group E’’ chemical, no evidence
of carcinogenicity for humans, by all
routes of exposure, based upon lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in rats and
mice.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. 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:
a. 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;
b. The exposure estimate does not
underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group; and
c. 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:14 Jun 19, 2007
Jkt 211001
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:
For the acute dietary assessment, 100
PCT was assumed for all registered and
proposed commodities. For the chronic
assessment, average weighted PCT
information was used for the following
commodities: Apples (30%), artichokes
(5%), garden beets (15%), blueberry
(10%), broccoli (35%), brussels sprouts
(55%), cabbage (20%), cantaloupe
(30%), carrots (<1%), cauliflower (40%),
celery (5%), cherries (5%), collards
(10%), corn, field and sweet (<1%),
cotton (5%), cucumbers (5%), eggplant
(45%), grapefruit (5%), grapes (30%),
honeydew (10%), hops (90%), kale
(30%), lemons (<1%), lettuce (60%),
oranges (5%), peaches (5%), pears
(10%), peppers (25%), potatoes (35%),
pumpkin (5%), spinach (20%), squash
(10%), sugar beets (<1%), tangerines
(10%), tomatoes (15%), and watermelon
(10%). A default value of 1% was used
for all commodities which were
reported as having <1 PCT.
EPA uses an average PCT for chronic
dietary risk analysis. The average PCT
figure for each existing use is derived by
combining available federal, state, and
private market survey data for that use,
averaging by year, averaging across all
years, and rounding up to the nearest
multiple of five percent except for those
situations in which the average PCT is
less than one. In those cases <1% is
used as the average and <2.5% is used
as the maximum. EPA uses a maximum
PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the single
maximum value reported overall from
available federal, state, and private
market survey data on the existing use,
across all years, and rounded up to the
nearest multiple of five percent. In most
cases, EPA uses available data from
United States Department of
Agriculture/National Agricultural
Statistics Service (USDA/NASS),
Proprietary Market Surveys, and the
National Center for Food and
Agriculture Policy (NCFAP) for the most
recent six years.
The Agency believes that the three
conditions listed above 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
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
33909
consumption information for significant
subpopulations is 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
imidacloprid may be applied in a
particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency lacks sufficient
monitoring data to complete a
comprehensive dietary exposure
analysis and risk assessment for
imidacloprid 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 environmental fate characteristics of
imidacloprid. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Screening
Tool Reservoir (FIRST) and Screening
Concentration in groundwater (SCIGROW) models, the estimated
environmental concentrations (EECs) of
imidacloprid for acute exposures are
estimated to be 36.0 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 2.09 ppb for
ground water. The EECs for chronic
exposures are estimated to be 17.2 ppb
for surface water and 2.09 ppb for
ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
acute dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value of 36.0 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 17.2 ppb was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water.
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).
Imidacloprid is currently registered
for the following residential non-dietary
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
33910
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 20, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
sites: Granular products for application
to lawns and ornamental plants; readyto-use spray for application to flowers,
shrubs and house plants; plant spikes
for application to indoor and outdoor
residential potted plants; ready-to-use
(RTU) potting medium for indoor and
outdoor plant containers; liquid
concentrate for application to lawns,
trees, shrubs and flowers; and ready-touse liquid for directed spot application
to cats and dogs. In addition, there are
numerous registered products intended
for use by commercial applicators to
residential sites. These include gel baits
for cockroach control; products
intended for commercial ornamental,
lawn and turf pest control; products for
ant control; and products used as
preservatives for wood products,
building materials, textiles and plastics.
As these products are intended for use
by commercial applicators only, they
are not to be addressed in terms of
residential pesticide handler.
The risk assessment was conducted
using the following residential exposure
assumptions:
EPA has determined that residential
handlers are likely to be exposed to
imidacloprid residues via dermal and
inhalation routes during handling,
mixing, loading, and applying activities.
Based on the current use patterns, EPA
expects duration of exposure to be
short-term (1-30 days). EPA does not
expect imidacloprid use to result in
intermediate-term or long-term
exposure. The scenarios likely to result
in adult dermal and/or inhalation
residential handler exposures are as
follows:
Dermal and inhalation exposure
from using a granular push-type
spreader.
Dermal exposure from using potted
plant spikes.
Dermal exposure from using a plant
potting medium.
Dermal and inhalation exposure from
using a garden hose-end sprayer
(Dermal and inhalation exposure from
using a RTU trigger pump spray is
expected to be negligible compared to
exposures using a garden hose-end
sprayer and is, therefore, not assessed
separately).
Dermal and inhalation exposure from
using a water can/bucket for soil drench
applications.
Dermal exposure from using pet spoton.
EPA has also determined that there is
potential for short-term (1 to 30 days),
post-application exposure of adults and
children/toddlers from the many
residential uses of imidacloprid. Due to
residential application practices and the
half-lives observed in the turf
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:14 Jun 19, 2007
Jkt 211001
transferable residue study, intermediateterm and long-term post-application
exposures are not expected. The
scenarios likely to result in dermal
(adult and child/toddler) and incidental
oral non-dietary (child/toddler) shortterm post-application exposures are as
follows:
• Toddler oral hand-to-mouth
exposure from contacting treated turf.
• Toddler incidental oral ingestion of
granules.
• Toddler incidental oral ingestion of
pesticide-treated pet.
• Toddler incidental oral exposure
from contacting treated pet.
• Toddler dermal exposure from
hugging treated pet/contacting treated
pet.
• Toddler dermal exposure from
contacting treated turf.
• Adult dermal exposure from
contacting treated turf.
• Adult golfer dermal exposure from
contacting treated turf.
• Adolescent golfer dermal exposure
from contacting treated turf.
• Adult dermal exposure from
contacting treated pet.
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
imidacloprid and any other substances
and imidacloprid 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 imidacloprid 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 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 (10X) 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 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
toxicity and exposure unless EPA
determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for
infants and children. This additional
margin of safety is commonly referred to
as the FQPA safety factor. 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 FQPA
safety factor value based on the use of
traditional uncertainty/safety factors
and/or special FQPA safety factors, as
appropriate.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There is no quantitative or qualitative
evidence of increased susceptibility of
rat and rabbit fetuses to in utero
exposure in developmental studies.
There is no quantitative or qualitative
evidence of increased susceptibility of
rat offspring in the 2-generation
reproduction study. There is evidence of
increased qualitative susceptibility in
the rat developmental neurotoxicity
study, but the concern is low since:
i. The effects in pups are wellcharacterized with a clear NOAEL;
ii. The pup effects occur in the
presence of maternal toxicity with the
same NOAEL for effects in pups and
dams; and,
iii. The doses and endpoints selected
for regulatory purposes are protective of
the pup effects noted at higher doses in
the developmental neurotoxicity study.
Therefore, there are no residual
uncertainties for pre-natal/post-natal
toxicity in this study
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show that it would be
safe for infants and children to reduce
the FQPA safety factor to 1X. That
decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for
imidacloprid is complete.
ii. Although there is evidence of
qualitative susceptibility in the
developmental neurotoxicity study in
the rat, the concern is low and there are
no residual uncertainties for pre-natal/
post-natal toxicity, as discussed in Unit
III.
iii. There is no evidence that
imidacloprid results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the two-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The acute dietary food exposure
assessment utilizes existing and
proposed tolerance level residues and
100 PCT information for all
commodities. By using these screeninglevel assumptions, actual exposures/
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 20, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
risks will not be underestimated. The
chronic dietary food exposure
assessment utilizes existing and
proposed tolerance level residues and
PCT data verified by the Agency for
several existing uses. For all proposed
uses, 100 PCT is assumed. The chronic
assessment is somewhat refined and
based on reliable data and will not
underestimate exposure/risk.
Conservative ground and surface water
modeling estimates were used to
estimate both acute and chronic
exposures to residues of imidacloprid in
drinking water. The residential handler
assessment is based upon the residential
standard operating procedures (SOPs) in
conjunction with chemical-specific
study data in some cases and the
Pesticide Handlers Exposure Database
(PHED) unit exposures in other cases.
The majority of the residential postapplication assessment is based upon
chemical-specific turf transferable
residue data or other chemical-specific
post-application exposure study data.
The chemical-specific study data and
surrogate study data used are reliable
and are not expected to underestimate
risk to adults or to children. In a few
cases where chemical-specific data were
not available, the SOPs were used alone.
The residential SOPs are based upon
reasonable worst-case assumptions and
are not expected to underestimate risk.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by imidacloprid.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
Safety is assessed for acute and
chronic risks by comparing aggregate
exposure to the pesticide to the aPAD
and cPAD. The aPAD and cPAD are
calculated by dividing the LOC by all
applicable uncertainty/safety factors.
For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates
the probability of additional cancer
cases given aggregate exposure. Shortterm, intermediate-term, and long-term
risks are evaluated by comparing
aggregate exposure to the LOC to ensure
that the MOE called for by the product
of all applicable uncertainty/safety
factors is not exceeded.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to
imidacloprid will occupy 70% of the
aPAD for the population group
(children, 1 to 2 years old) receiving the
greatest exposure. Therefore, 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:14 Jun 19, 2007
Jkt 211001
that exposure to imidacloprid from food
and water will utilize 38% of the cPAD
for the population group (children, 1 to
2 years old) receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of imidacloprid is not
expected. Therefore, EPA does not
expect the aggregate exposure to exceed
100% of the cPAD.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Imidacloprid is currently registered
for use that could result in short-term
residential exposure and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic food and water and
short-term exposures for imidacloprid.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded that
food, water, and residential exposures
aggregated result in aggregate MOEs of
310 for the general U.S. population and
170 for children, 1 to 2 years old, the
population with the highest estimated
aggregate short-term exposure to
imidacloprid. These aggregate MOEs are
based on the pet-treatment scenario, the
use scenario resulting in the highest
estimated residential exposures for
adults and children. Post-application
exposures from pet treatment and turf
treatment were not combined in the
short-term aggregate assessment,
because of the low probability of these
exposures co-occurring.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account residential exposure
plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
Intermediate-term and long-term
aggregate risk assessments were not
performed because, based on the current
use patterns for imidacloprid, the
Agency does not expect exposures of
intermediate- or long-term durations to
occur.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. The Agency has classified
imidacloprid as a ‘‘Group E’’ chemical,
no evidence of carcinogenicity for
humans, by all routes of exposure, based
upon lack of evidence of carcinogenicity
in rats and mice. Imidacloprid is not
expected to pose a cancer risk.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to imidacloprid
residues.
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
33911
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methods are
available for determination of
imidacloprid residues of concern in
plant (Bayer Gas Chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry (GC/MS) Method 00200)
and livestock commodities (Bayer GC/
MS Method 00191). These methods
have undergone successful EPA petition
method validations (PMVs) and may be
requested from: Chief, Analytical
Chemistry Branch, Environmental
Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft.
Meade, MD 20755–5350; telephone
number: (410) 305–2905; e-mail address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
There are no established Canadian or
Mexican Maxium Residue Levels
(MRLs) for the proposed uses. There is
an established Codex MRL for the sum
of imidacloprid and its metabolites
containing the 6-chloropyridinyl
moiety, expressed as imidacloprid, in/
on cereal grain at 0.05 ppm, which is
consistent with U.S. tolerances on cereal
grains.
V. Conclusion
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petitions, EPA has
modified the proposed tolerances as
follows: 1. Added tolerances for millet,
proso, forage at 2.0 ppm; millet, proso,
hay at 6.0 ppm; millet, proso, straw at
3.0 ppm; millet, pearl, forage at 2.0
ppm; millet, pearl, hay at 6.0 ppm; and
millet, pearl, straw at 3.0 ppm (all in PP
6E7116); 2. Revised tolerances for
peanut, hay at 35 ppm and peanut, meal
at 0.75 ppm (PP 6E7116); soybean, hay
at 35 ppm and soybean, seed at 3.5 ppm
(PP 6F7049); and 3. Changed the
commodity term ‘‘soybean, aspirated
grain fractions’’ (PP 6F7049) to
‘‘aspirated grain fractions’’, the
recommended commodity term in the
Office of Pesticide Program’s Food and
Feed Commodity Vocabulary. The
proposed tolerance on oat grain (PP
6E7116) is not needed, since a tolerance
of 0.05 ppm for oat, grain already exists.
EPA determined that tolerances for
millet forage, hay and straw are needed
based on residue data for similar grain
crops showing residues in these
commodities. EPA determined that the
proposed tolerances for peanut hay/
meal and soybean hay/seed were
inappropriate and should be revised
based on analyses of the residue field
trial data using the Agency’s Tolerance
Spreadsheet in accordance with the
Agency’s Guidance for Setting Pesticide
Tolerances Based on Field Trial Data
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP).
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
33912
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 20, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
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., 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).
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.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers
and food retailers, not States or tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 6, 2000) do not apply
to this rule. In addition, This rule does
not 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).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
Therefore, tolerances are established
for combined residues of imidacloprid,
1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-Nnitro-2-imidazolidinimine, and its
metabolites containing the 6chloropyridinyl moiety, all expressed as
imidacloprid, in or on peanut at 0.45
ppm; peanut, hay at 35 ppm; peanut,
meal at 0.75 ppm; millet, proso, grain at
0.05 ppm; millet, proso, forage at 2.0
ppm; millet, proso, hay at 6.0 ppm;
millet, proso, straw at 3.0 ppm; millet,
pearl, grain at 0.05 ppm; millet, pearl,
forage at 2.0 ppm; millet, pearl, hay at
6.0 ppm; millet, pearl, straw at 3.0 ppm;
kava, roots at 0.40 ppm; kava, leaves at
4.0 ppm; caneberry, subgroup 13-A at
2.5 ppm; raspberry, wild at 2.5 ppm;
soybean, seed at 3.5 ppm; soybean,
forage at 8.0 ppm; soybean hay at 35
ppm and aspirated grain fractions at 240
ppm.
In the Federal Register of August 11,
2006 (71 FR 46110) (FRL–8081–8), EPA
established a tolerance for residues of
imidacloprid and its metabolites
containing the 6-chloropyridinyl
moiety, all expressed as the parent, in
or on the commodity ‘‘Herbs subgroup
19B, fresh herbs’’. The correct
commodity term is ‘‘Herbs subgroup 19A, fresh herbs’’. Therefore, the tolerance
for this commodity is revised to read
‘‘Herbs subgroup 19-A, fresh herbs’’ at
8.0 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, 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) or Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from
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).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report to each House of
the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. This final rule is not
a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: June 11, 2007.
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 180.472, the table in
paragraph (a) is amended by
alphabetically adding commodities; by
revising the entries for ‘‘Caneberry,
subgroup 13A’’ and ‘‘Soybean’’ seed,
and revising the entry ‘‘Herbs, subgroup
19B, fresh herbs’’, to read ‘‘Herbs,
subgroup 19-A, fresh herbs’’.
The amendments read as follows:
I
§ 180.472 Imidacloprid; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
Commodity
*
*
Parts per million
*
*
*
Aspirated grain fractions
240
*
*
*
*
*
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Caneberry, subgroup 13-A
2.5
*
*
*
*
*
Herbs subgroup 19-A, fresh herbs
8.0
*
*
*
*
*
Kava, leaves
VerDate Aug<31>2005
4.0
17:14 Jun 19, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 20, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Commodity
33913
Parts per million
Kava, roots
0.40
*
*
*
*
*
Millet, pearl, forage
2.0
Millet, pearl, grain
0.05
Millet, pearl, hay
6.0
Millet, pearl, straw
3.0
Millet, proso, forage
2.0
Millet, proso, grain
0.05
Millet, proso, hay
6.0
Millet, proso, straw
3.0
*
*
*
*
*
Peanut
0.45
Peanut, hay
35
Peanut, meal
0.75
*
*
*
*
*
Raspberry, wild
2.5
*
*
*
*
*
Soybean, forage
8.0
Soybean, hay
35
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Soybean, seed
*
*
3.5
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E7–11792 Filed 6–19–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 1
[FCC 07–94]
Increase of Forfeiture Maxima for
Obscene, Indecent, and Profane
Broadcasts to Implement the
Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act
of 2005
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document amends the
Commission’s Rules to increase the
maximum forfeiture penalties for
obscene, indecent, and profane
broadcasts from $32,500 to $325,000 for
each violation or each day of a
continuing violation, except that the
amount assessed for any continuing
violation cannot exceed $3,000,000.
This action is necessary to implement
The Broadcast Decency Enforcement
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:14 Jun 19, 2007
Jkt 211001
Act of 2005, signed into law by
President George W. Bush on June 15,
2006. This document is limited to
revising the Commission’s Rules
pursuant to the Broadcast Decency
Enforcement Act, which concerns only
penalties for obscenity, indecency, and
profanity broadcast violations. The
existing penalty limits described in the
Commission’s Rules would remain as
the applicable maxima for all other
broadcast violations subject to those
Rules.
DATES: Effective July 20, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hillary S. DeNigro, Enforcement Bureau,
Investigations and Hearings Division,
(202) 418–7334.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Order,
FCC 07–94, adopted on May 17, 2007,
and released on June 1, 2007. The
complete text of this Order is available
for inspection and copying during
normal business hours in the FCC
Reference Information Center, Courtyard
Level, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554 and also may be
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
purchased from the Commission’s copy
contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc.,
at 1–800–378–3160, CY–B402, 445 12th
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
On June 15, 2006, President George
W. Bush signed into law The Broadcast
Decency Enforcement Act of 2005
(‘‘Broadcast Decency Enforcement
Act’’). (See Pub. L. 109–235, 120 Stat.
491 (2006)). The legislation amends
section 503(b)(2) of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended
(‘‘Communications Act’’), 47 U.S.C.
503(b)(2), to increase the maximum
forfeiture penalties for obscene,
indecent, and profane broadcasts. This
Order amends section 1.80(b)(1) of the
Commission’s Rules (‘‘Rules’’), 47 CFR
1.80(b)(1), to reflect the new penalties.
Section 1.80(b)(1) of the Rules
specifies the maximum possible
forfeiture penalties for a range of
violations, including, but not limited to:
Failure to comply with the terms and
conditions of any Commission license,
permit, certificate or instrument of
authorization; failure to comply with
any provision of the Communications
Act or any Commission rule, regulation
or order; and violation of section 1304
(broadcast of lottery information), 1343
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 20, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33907-33913]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-11792]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0968; FRL-8135-5]
Imidacloprid; Pesticide Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for combined residues
of imidacloprid and its metabolites containing the 6-chloropyridinyl
moiety, all expressed as the parent, in or on peanut, peanut hay and
peanut meal; pearl millet grain, forage, hay and straw; proso millet
grain, forage, hay and straw; kava roots and leaves; raspberry, wild;
soybean forage and hay; and aspirated grain fractions. It also amends
existing tolerances for combined residues of imidacloprid and its
metabolites containing the 6-chloropyridinyl moiety in or on caneberry
subgroup 13-A and soybean seed. Bayer CropScience LLC and Interregional
Research Project No. 4 (IR-4) requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). This regulation also
corrects a typographical error in the commodity term for the existing
tolerance on the herbs subgroup, fresh herbs.
DATES: This regulation is effective June 20, 2007. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before August 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-2006-0968. To access the
electronic docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, select ``Advanced
Search,'' then ``Docket Search.'' Insert the docket ID number where
indicated and select the ``Submit'' button. Follow the instructions on
the regulations.gov web site to view the docket index or access
available documents. All documents in the docket are listed in the
docket index available in regulations.gov. 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 Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington,
VA. The Docket Facility is open 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: Barbara Madden, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-6463; e-mail address: madden.barbara@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 those
engaged in the following activities:
Crop production (NAICS code 111), e.g., agricultural
workers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers.
Animal production (NAICS code 112), e.g., cattle ranchers
and farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311), e.g., agricultural
workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers;
ranchers; pesticide applicators.
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 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 to
provide 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 EPA's tolerance regulations at
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, any person may file an objection
to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on
those objections. 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-2006-0968 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 as required by 40 CFR part 178 on or
before August 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 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 this copy, identified by docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0968, 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, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., 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 Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
[[Page 33908]]
II. Petition for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of December 20, 2006 (71 FR 76321) (FRL-
8104-4), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of pesticide petitions (PP
6E7108 and PP 6E7116) by Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4),
681 U.S. Highway No. 1 South, North Brunswick, NJ 08902-3390. The
petitions requested that 40 CFR 180.472 be amended by establishing
tolerances for combined residues of the insecticide imidacloprid, 1-
[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-N-nitro-2-imidazolidinimine, and its
metabolites containing the 6-chloropyridinyl moiety, all expressed as
imidacloprid, in or on peanut at 0.45 parts per million (ppm); peanut,
hay at 70 ppm; peanut, meal at 0.9 ppm; kava, roots at 0.4 ppm; kava,
leaves at 4.0 ppm; millet, pearl, grain at 0.05 ppm; millet, proso,
grain at 0.05 ppm; and oat, grain at 0.05 (all requested in PP 6E7116);
and on caneberry subgroup 13A and raspberry, wild at 2.5 ppm (requested
in PP 6E7108). That notice included summaries of the petitions prepared
by IR-4, which are available to the public in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
In the Federal Register of July 14, 2006 (71 FR 40099) (FRL-8060-
4), 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
6F7049) by Bayer CropScience LLC, 2 T. W. Alexander Drive, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.472 be
amended by establishing tolerances for combined residues of the
insecticide imidacloprid, 1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-N-nitro-2-
imidazolidinimine, and its metabolites containing the 6-chloropyridinyl
moiety, all expressed as imidacloprid, in or on soybean, aspirated
grain fractions at 240.0 parts per million (ppm); soybean, forage at
8.0 ppm; soybean, hay at 30.0 ppm; and soybean, seed at 1.6 ppm. That
notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Bayer
CropScience LLC, the registrant, which is available to the public in
the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received
in response to the notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petitions, EPA has
modified the proposed tolerances. The modifications and reasons for
these changes are explained in Unit V.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of the 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 the FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is
a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of the FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.'' These provisions were added to the FFDCA by the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D), 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 for the petitioned-for tolerances
for combined residues of imidacloprid, 1-[(6-chloro-3-
pyridinyl)methyl]-N-nitro-2- imidazolidinimine, and its metabolites
containing the 6-chloropyridinyl moiety, all expressed as the parent,
in or on peanut at 0.45 ppm; peanut, hay at 35 ppm; peanut, meal at
0.75 ppm; millet, proso, grain at 0.05 ppm; millet, proso, forage at
2.0 ppm; millet, proso, hay at 6.0 ppm; millet, proso, straw at 3.0
ppm; millet, pearl, grain at 0.05 ppm; millet, pearl, forage at 2.0
ppm; millet, pearl, hay at 6.0 ppm; millet, pearl, straw at 3.0 ppm;
kava, roots at 0.40 ppm; kava, leaves at 4.0 ppm; caneberry, subgroup
13-A at 2.5 ppm; raspberry, wild at 2.5 ppm; soybean, seed at 3.5 ppm;
soybean, forage at 8.0 ppm; soybean hay at 35 ppm and aspirated grain
fractions at 240 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks
associated with establishing the tolerance follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by imidacloprid 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
final rule published in the Federal Register of June 13, 2003 (68 FR
35303), (FRL-7310-8); available at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-
PEST/2003/June/Day-13/p14880.htm.
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological level of concern (LOC) is derived
from the highest dose at which the NOAEL in the toxicology study
identified as appropriate for use in risk assessment. However, if a
NOAEL cannot be determined, the LOAEL of concern are identified is
sometimes used for risk assessment. Uncertainty/safety factors (UF) are
used in conjunction with the LOC to take into account 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. Safety is assessed for acute and chronic
risks by comparing aggregate exposure to the pesticide to the acute
population adjusted dose (aPAD) and chronic population adjusted dose
(cPAD). The aPAD and cPAD are calculated by dividing the LOC by all
applicable uncertainty/safety factors. Short-term, intermediate-term,
and long-term risks are evaluated by comparing aggregate exposure to
the LOC to ensure that the margin of exposure (MOE) called for by the
product of all applicable uncertainty/safety factors is not exceeded.
For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of
exposure will lead to some degree of risk and estimates risk in terms
of the probability of occurrence of additional adverse cases.
Generally, cancer risks are considered non-threshold. For more
information on the general principles EPA uses in risk characterization
and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for imidacloprid used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of June 13, 2003
[[Page 33909]]
(68 FR 35303), (FRL-7310-8); available at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/
EPA-PEST/2003/June/Day-13/p14880.htm.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to imidacloprid, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing imidacloprid tolerances in 40
CFR 180.472. EPA assessed dietary exposures from imidacloprid 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. In estimating acute dietary
exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1994-1996, and 1998 Nationwide
Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue
levels in food, EPA assumed all foods for which there are tolerances
were treated and contain tolerance-level residues.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996,
and 1998 Nationwide CSFII. As to residues in food, EPA assumed
tolerance-level residues for all registered and proposed commodities.
EPA relied on percent crop treated (PCT) information for some
registered commodities but assumed 100 PCT for all proposed new uses.
iii. Cancer. An exposure assessment related to cancer risk is
unnecessary. The Agency has classified imidacloprid as a ``Group E''
chemical, no evidence of carcinogenicity for humans, by all routes of
exposure, based upon lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in rats and
mice.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. 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:
a. 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;
b. The exposure estimate does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group; and
c. 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:
For the acute dietary assessment, 100 PCT was assumed for all
registered and proposed commodities. For the chronic assessment,
average weighted PCT information was used for the following
commodities: Apples (30%), artichokes (5%), garden beets (15%),
blueberry (10%), broccoli (35%), brussels sprouts (55%), cabbage (20%),
cantaloupe (30%), carrots (<1%), cauliflower (40%), celery (5%),
cherries (5%), collards (10%), corn, field and sweet (<1%), cotton
(5%), cucumbers (5%), eggplant (45%), grapefruit (5%), grapes (30%),
honeydew (10%), hops (90%), kale (30%), lemons (<1%), lettuce (60%),
oranges (5%), peaches (5%), pears (10%), peppers (25%), potatoes (35%),
pumpkin (5%), spinach (20%), squash (10%), sugar beets (<1%),
tangerines (10%), tomatoes (15%), and watermelon (10%). A default value
of 1% was used for all commodities which were reported as having <1
PCT.
EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis. The
average PCT figure for each existing use is derived by combining
available federal, state, and private market survey data for that use,
averaging by year, averaging across all years, and rounding up to the
nearest multiple of five percent except for those situations in which
the average PCT is less than one. In those cases <1% is used as the
average and <2.5% is used as the maximum. EPA uses a maximum PCT for
acute dietary risk analysis. The maximum PCT figure is the single
maximum value reported overall from available federal, state, and
private market survey data on the existing use, across all years, and
rounded up to the nearest multiple of five percent. In most cases, EPA
uses available data from United States Department of Agriculture/
National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA/NASS), Proprietary
Market Surveys, and the National Center for Food and Agriculture Policy
(NCFAP) for the most recent six years.
The Agency believes that the three conditions listed above 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 is 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 imidacloprid
may be applied in a particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency lacks
sufficient monitoring data to complete a comprehensive dietary exposure
analysis and risk assessment for imidacloprid 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 environmental
fate characteristics of imidacloprid. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Screening Tool Reservoir (FIRST) and
Screening Concentration in groundwater (SCI-GROW) models, the estimated
environmental concentrations (EECs) of imidacloprid for acute exposures
are estimated to be 36.0 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and
2.09 ppb for ground water. The EECs for chronic exposures are estimated
to be 17.2 ppb for surface water and 2.09 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 36.0 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 17.2 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water.
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).
Imidacloprid is currently registered for the following residential
non-dietary
[[Page 33910]]
sites: Granular products for application to lawns and ornamental
plants; ready-to-use spray for application to flowers, shrubs and house
plants; plant spikes for application to indoor and outdoor residential
potted plants; ready-to-use (RTU) potting medium for indoor and outdoor
plant containers; liquid concentrate for application to lawns, trees,
shrubs and flowers; and ready-to-use liquid for directed spot
application to cats and dogs. In addition, there are numerous
registered products intended for use by commercial applicators to
residential sites. These include gel baits for cockroach control;
products intended for commercial ornamental, lawn and turf pest
control; products for ant control; and products used as preservatives
for wood products, building materials, textiles and plastics. As these
products are intended for use by commercial applicators only, they are
not to be addressed in terms of residential pesticide handler.
The risk assessment was conducted using the following residential
exposure assumptions:
EPA has determined that residential handlers are likely to be
exposed to imidacloprid residues via dermal and inhalation routes
during handling, mixing, loading, and applying activities. Based on the
current use patterns, EPA expects duration of exposure to be short-term
(1-30 days). EPA does not expect imidacloprid use to result in
intermediate-term or long-term exposure. The scenarios likely to result
in adult dermal and/or inhalation residential handler exposures are as
follows:
Dermal and inhalation exposure from using a granular push-type
spreader.
Dermal exposure from using potted plant spikes.
Dermal exposure from using a plant potting medium.
Dermal and inhalation exposure from using a garden hose-end
sprayer (Dermal and inhalation exposure from using a RTU trigger pump
spray is expected to be negligible compared to exposures using a garden
hose-end sprayer and is, therefore, not assessed separately).
Dermal and inhalation exposure from using a water can/bucket for
soil drench applications.
Dermal exposure from using pet spot-on.
EPA has also determined that there is potential for short-term (1
to 30 days), post-application exposure of adults and children/toddlers
from the many residential uses of imidacloprid. Due to residential
application practices and the half-lives observed in the turf
transferable residue study, intermediate-term and long-term post-
application exposures are not expected. The scenarios likely to result
in dermal (adult and child/toddler) and incidental oral non-dietary
(child/toddler) short-term post-application exposures are as follows:
Toddler oral hand-to-mouth exposure from contacting
treated turf.
Toddler incidental oral ingestion of granules.
Toddler incidental oral ingestion of pesticide-treated
pet.
Toddler incidental oral exposure from contacting treated
pet.
Toddler dermal exposure from hugging treated pet/
contacting treated pet.
Toddler dermal exposure from contacting treated turf.
Adult dermal exposure from contacting treated turf.
Adult golfer dermal exposure from contacting treated
turf.
Adolescent golfer dermal exposure from contacting treated
turf.
Adult dermal exposure from contacting treated pet.
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 imidacloprid and any other
substances and imidacloprid 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 imidacloprid 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 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 (10X) 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. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA safety factor. 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 FQPA
safety factor value based on the use of traditional uncertainty/safety
factors and/or special FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no quantitative or
qualitative evidence of increased susceptibility of rat and rabbit
fetuses to in utero exposure in developmental studies. There is no
quantitative or qualitative evidence of increased susceptibility of rat
offspring in the 2-generation reproduction study. There is evidence of
increased qualitative susceptibility in the rat developmental
neurotoxicity study, but the concern is low since:
i. The effects in pups are well-characterized with a clear NOAEL;
ii. The pup effects occur in the presence of maternal toxicity
with the same NOAEL for effects in pups and dams; and,
iii. The doses and endpoints selected for regulatory purposes are
protective of the pup effects noted at higher doses in the
developmental neurotoxicity study. Therefore, there are no residual
uncertainties for pre-natal/post-natal toxicity in this study
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show that it
would be safe for infants and children to reduce the FQPA safety factor
to 1X. That decision is based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for imidacloprid is complete.
ii. Although there is evidence of qualitative susceptibility in the
developmental neurotoxicity study in the rat, the concern is low and
there are no residual uncertainties for pre-natal/post-natal toxicity,
as discussed in Unit III.
iii. There is no evidence that imidacloprid results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the two-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The acute dietary food exposure assessment utilizes existing
and proposed tolerance level residues and 100 PCT information for all
commodities. By using these screening-level assumptions, actual
exposures/
[[Page 33911]]
risks will not be underestimated. The chronic dietary food exposure
assessment utilizes existing and proposed tolerance level residues and
PCT data verified by the Agency for several existing uses. For all
proposed uses, 100 PCT is assumed. The chronic assessment is somewhat
refined and based on reliable data and will not underestimate exposure/
risk. Conservative ground and surface water modeling estimates were
used to estimate both acute and chronic exposures to residues of
imidacloprid in drinking water. The residential handler assessment is
based upon the residential standard operating procedures (SOPs) in
conjunction with chemical-specific study data in some cases and the
Pesticide Handlers Exposure Database (PHED) unit exposures in other
cases. The majority of the residential post-application assessment is
based upon chemical-specific turf transferable residue data or other
chemical-specific post-application exposure study data. The chemical-
specific study data and surrogate study data used are reliable and are
not expected to underestimate risk to adults or to children. In a few
cases where chemical-specific data were not available, the SOPs were
used alone. The residential SOPs are based upon reasonable worst-case
assumptions and are not expected to underestimate risk. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
imidacloprid.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
Safety is assessed for acute and chronic risks by comparing
aggregate exposure to the pesticide to the aPAD and cPAD. The aPAD and
cPAD are calculated by dividing the LOC by all applicable uncertainty/
safety factors. For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the probability
of additional cancer cases given aggregate exposure. Short-term,
intermediate-term, and long-term risks are evaluated by comparing
aggregate exposure to the LOC to ensure that the MOE called for by the
product of all applicable uncertainty/safety factors is not exceeded.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to imidacloprid will occupy 70% of the aPAD for the population group
(children, 1 to 2 years old) receiving the greatest exposure.
Therefore, 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
imidacloprid from food and water will utilize 38% of the cPAD for the
population group (children, 1 to 2 years old) receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the residential use patterns, chronic residential
exposure to residues of imidacloprid is not expected. Therefore, EPA
does not expect the aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of the cPAD.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background exposure level).
Imidacloprid is currently registered for use that could result in
short-term residential exposure and the Agency has determined that it
is appropriate to aggregate chronic food and water and short-term
exposures for imidacloprid.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded that food, water, and residential
exposures aggregated result in aggregate MOEs of 310 for the general
U.S. population and 170 for children, 1 to 2 years old, the population
with the highest estimated aggregate short-term exposure to
imidacloprid. These aggregate MOEs are based on the pet-treatment
scenario, the use scenario resulting in the highest estimated
residential exposures for adults and children. Post-application
exposures from pet treatment and turf treatment were not combined in
the short-term aggregate assessment, because of the low probability of
these exposures co-occurring.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
Intermediate-term and long-term aggregate risk assessments were not
performed because, based on the current use patterns for imidacloprid,
the Agency does not expect exposures of intermediate- or long-term
durations to occur.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. The Agency has
classified imidacloprid as a ``Group E'' chemical, no evidence of
carcinogenicity for humans, by all routes of exposure, based upon lack
of evidence of carcinogenicity in rats and mice. Imidacloprid is not
expected to pose a cancer risk.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to imidacloprid residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methods are available for determination of
imidacloprid residues of concern in plant (Bayer Gas Chromatography/
Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) Method 00200) and livestock commodities
(Bayer GC/MS Method 00191). These methods have undergone successful EPA
petition method validations (PMVs) and may be requested from: Chief,
Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes
Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; e-mail
address: residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
There are no established Canadian or Mexican Maxium Residue Levels
(MRLs) for the proposed uses. There is an established Codex MRL for the
sum of imidacloprid and its metabolites containing the 6-
chloropyridinyl moiety, expressed as imidacloprid, in/on cereal grain
at 0.05 ppm, which is consistent with U.S. tolerances on cereal grains.
V. Conclusion
Based upon review of the data supporting the petitions, EPA has
modified the proposed tolerances as follows: 1. Added tolerances for
millet, proso, forage at 2.0 ppm; millet, proso, hay at 6.0 ppm;
millet, proso, straw at 3.0 ppm; millet, pearl, forage at 2.0 ppm;
millet, pearl, hay at 6.0 ppm; and millet, pearl, straw at 3.0 ppm (all
in PP 6E7116); 2. Revised tolerances for peanut, hay at 35 ppm and
peanut, meal at 0.75 ppm (PP 6E7116); soybean, hay at 35 ppm and
soybean, seed at 3.5 ppm (PP 6F7049); and 3. Changed the commodity term
``soybean, aspirated grain fractions'' (PP 6F7049) to ``aspirated grain
fractions'', the recommended commodity term in the Office of Pesticide
Program's Food and Feed Commodity Vocabulary. The proposed tolerance on
oat grain (PP 6E7116) is not needed, since a tolerance of 0.05 ppm for
oat, grain already exists. EPA determined that tolerances for millet
forage, hay and straw are needed based on residue data for similar
grain crops showing residues in these commodities. EPA determined that
the proposed tolerances for peanut hay/meal and soybean hay/seed were
inappropriate and should be revised based on analyses of the residue
field trial data using the Agency's Tolerance Spreadsheet in accordance
with the Agency's Guidance for Setting Pesticide Tolerances Based on
Field Trial Data Standard Operating Procedure (SOP).
[[Page 33912]]
Therefore, tolerances are established for combined residues of
imidacloprid, 1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-N-nitro-2-
imidazolidinimine, and its metabolites containing the 6-chloropyridinyl
moiety, all expressed as imidacloprid, in or on peanut at 0.45 ppm;
peanut, hay at 35 ppm; peanut, meal at 0.75 ppm; millet, proso, grain
at 0.05 ppm; millet, proso, forage at 2.0 ppm; millet, proso, hay at
6.0 ppm; millet, proso, straw at 3.0 ppm; millet, pearl, grain at 0.05
ppm; millet, pearl, forage at 2.0 ppm; millet, pearl, hay at 6.0 ppm;
millet, pearl, straw at 3.0 ppm; kava, roots at 0.40 ppm; kava, leaves
at 4.0 ppm; caneberry, subgroup 13-A at 2.5 ppm; raspberry, wild at 2.5
ppm; soybean, seed at 3.5 ppm; soybean, forage at 8.0 ppm; soybean hay
at 35 ppm and aspirated grain fractions at 240 ppm.
In the Federal Register of August 11, 2006 (71 FR 46110) (FRL-8081-
8), EPA established a tolerance for residues of imidacloprid and its
metabolites containing the 6-chloropyridinyl moiety, all expressed as
the parent, in or on the commodity ``Herbs subgroup 19B, fresh herbs''.
The correct commodity term is ``Herbs subgroup 19-A, fresh herbs''.
Therefore, the tolerance for this commodity is revised to read ``Herbs
subgroup 19-A, fresh herbs'' at 8.0 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, 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) or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997). 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., 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).
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.
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this action
alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities
established by Congress in the preemption provisions of section
408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that this action
will not have a substantial direct effect on States or tribal
governments, on the relationship between the national government and
the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6,
2000) do not apply to this rule. In addition, This rule does not 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).
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).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal
Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 11, 2007.
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 180.472, the table in paragraph (a) is amended by
alphabetically adding commodities; by revising the entries for
``Caneberry, subgroup 13A'' and ``Soybean'' seed, and revising the
entry ``Herbs, subgroup 19B, fresh herbs'', to read ``Herbs, subgroup
19-A, fresh herbs''.
The amendments read as follows:
Sec. 180.472 Imidacloprid; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Aspirated grain fractions 240
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Caneberry, subgroup 13-A 2.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Herbs subgroup 19-A, fresh herbs 8.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Kava, leaves 4.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 33913]]
Kava, roots 0.40
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Millet, pearl, forage 2.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Millet, pearl, grain 0.05
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Millet, pearl, hay 6.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Millet, pearl, straw 3.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Millet, proso, forage 2.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Millet, proso, grain 0.05
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Millet, proso, hay 6.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Millet, proso, straw 3.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Peanut 0.45
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peanut, hay 35
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peanut, meal 0.75
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Raspberry, wild 2.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Soybean, forage 8.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Soybean, hay 35
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Soybean, seed 3.5
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-11792 Filed 6-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S