Zeta-cypermethrin; Pesticide Tolerance, 1517-1525 [E7-25392]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
adopted EDSTAC’s recommendation
that the Program include evaluations of
potential effects in wildlife. For
pesticide chemicals, EPA will use the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), and, to the
extent that effects in wildlife may help
determine whether a substance may
have an effect in humans, FFDCA has
authority to require the wildlife
evaluations. As the science develops
and resources allow, screening of
additional hormone systems may be
added to the Endocrine Disruptor
Screening Program (EDSP).
When the appropriate screening and/
or testing protocols being considered
under the Agency’s EDSP have been
developed, PHMB may be subjected to
additional screening and/or testing to
better characterize effects related to
endocrine disruption.
B. Analytical Method(s)
An analytical method for food is not
needed. Food contact sanitizers are
typically regulated by state health
departments to ensure that the food
industry is using these products in
compliance with regulations in 40 CFR
180.940. The end use solution that is
applied to the food contact surface is
analyzed not food items that may come
into contact with the treated surface. An
analytical method is available to analyze
the use dilution that is applied to food
contact surfaces. The solution can be
analyzed by use of the
spectrophotometric method.
C. Existing Tolerances
There is no existing tolerance or
exemption from tolerance for PHMB.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
D. International Tolerances
No Codex, Canadian, or Mexican
maximum residue limits (MRLs) have
been established for any food uses at
this time.
VIII. 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 final 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 Jan 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
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 final rule. In addition, this final
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).
IX. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1517
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. This final rule is not
a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: December 18, 2007.
Betty Shackleford,
Acting Director, Antimicrobials 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 180.1280 is added to
subpart D to read as follows:
I
§ 180.1280 Poly(hexamethylenebiguanide)
hydrochloride (PHMB) exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance.
Poly(hexamethylenebiguanide)
hydrochloride (PHMB)(CAS Reg. No.
32289–58–0) is exempt from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues
of the antimicrobial in or on all food
commodities when the residues are the
result of the lawful application of a food
contact surface sanitizer containing
PHMB at 550 parts per million (ppm).
[FR Doc. E8–189 Filed 1–8–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0300; FRL–8346–3]
Zeta-cypermethrin; Pesticide
Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for combined residues of
zeta-cypermethrin and its inactive Risomers in or on Citrus (dried pulp, fruit
and oil); oilseed commodities (seeds of
borage, castor oil plant, Chinese tallow
tree, crambe, cuphea, echium,
euphorbia, evening primrose, flax, gold
of pleasure, hare’s-ear mustard, jojoba,
E:\FR\FM\09JAR1.SGM
09JAR1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
1518
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
lesquerella, lunaria, meadowfoam,
milkweed, mustard, niger seed, oil
radish, poppy, rose hip, sesame, Stokes
aster, sweet rocket, tallowwood, tea oil
plant, and vernonia); oilseed, refined
oils (refined oils of castor oil plant,
Chinese tallowtree, euphorbia, evening
primrose, jojoba, niger seed, rose hip,
stokes aster, tallowwood, tea oil plant
and vernonia); okra; rice, wild; and
safflower, seed. Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). This
regulation also deletes time-limited flax
seed tolerances which are made
redundant and unnecessary by
establishment of the permanent
tolerance on flax seed.
DATES: This regulation is effective
January 9, 2008. Objections and requests
for hearings must be received on or
before March 10, 2008, 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–2007–0300. 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
website 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:
Susan Stanton, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 Jan 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
(703) 305-5218; e-mail address:
stanton.susan@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 FFDCA, any
person may file an objection to any
aspect of this regulation and may also
request a hearing on those objections.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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–2007–0300 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 March 10, 2008.
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–2007–0300, 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.
II. Petition for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of June 27,
2007 (72 FR 35237-35242) (FRL–8133–
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 6E7132 and PP
6E7133) by Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College
Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ
08540-6635. The petitions requested
that 40 CFR 180.418 be amended by
establishing tolerances for combined
residues of the insecticide zetacypermethrin, S-cyano(3phenoxyphenyl) methyl (±)-cis-trans 3(2,2-dichloroethenyl)-2,2
dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and
its inactive R-isomers, in or on the
following food commodities: PP 6E7132
- Rice, wild, grain at 1.50 parts per
million (ppm); okra at 0.20 ppm;
E:\FR\FM\09JAR1.SGM
09JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
safflower, seed at 0.20 ppm; and PP
6E7133 - Fruit, citrus, group 10 at 0.25
ppm; citrus, dried, pulp at 0.50 ppm;
and citrus, oil at 0.90 ppm. That notice
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by FMC Corporation, 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.
In the Federal Register of October 24,
2007 (72 FR 60369-60371) (FRL–8150–
8), 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 7E7255) by
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201
W, Princeton, NJ 08540-6635. The
petition requested that 40 CFR 180.418
be amended by establishing tolerances
for combined residues of the insecticide
zeta-cypermethrin, S-cyano(3phenoxyphenyl) methyl (±)-cis-trans 3(2,2-dichloroethenyl)-2,2
dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and
its inactive R-isomers, at 0.2 ppm in or
on the following commodities: borage,
seed; castor oil plant, seed; Chinese
tallowtree, seed; crambe, seed; cuphea,
seed; echium, seed; euphorbia, seed;
evening primrose, seed; flax, seed; gold
of pleasure, seed; hare’s ear mustard,
seed; jojoba, seed; lesquerella, seed;
lunaria, seed; meadowfoam, seed;
milkweed, seed; mustard, seed; niger
seed, seed; oil radish, seed; poppy, seed;
rose hip, seed; sesame, seed; Stokes
aster, seed; sweet rocket, seed;
tallowwood, seed; tea oil plant, seed;
and vernonia, seed. That notice
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by FMC Corporation, the
registrant, which is available to the
public in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. Comments were
received from a private citizen on the
notice of filing. EPA’s response to these
comments is discussed in Unit IV.C.
below.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has revised
the tolerance levels for citrus
commodities and determined that a
separate tolerance is needed for refined
oils derived from several of the
proposed oilseed crops. The reason for
these changes is explained in Unit V.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 Jan 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
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....’’ These provisions
were added to FFDCA by the Food
Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in
FFDCA 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
tolerance for combined residues of zetacypermethrin and its inactive R-isomers
on Borage, seed at 0.2 ppm; Castor oil
plant, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Castor oil
plant, seed at 0.2 ppm; Chinese
tallowtree, refined oil at 0.4 ppm;
Chinese tallowtree, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Citrus, dried pulp at 1.8 ppm; Citrus, oil
at 4.0 ppm; Crambe, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Cuphea, seed at 0.2 ppm; Echium, seed
at 0.2 ppm; Euphorbia, refined oil at 0.4
ppm; Euphorbia, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Evening primrose, refined oil at 0.4
ppm; Evening primrose, seed at 0.2
ppm; Flax, seed at 0.2 ppm; Fruit,
citrus, group 10 at 0.35 ppm; Gold of
pleasure, seed at 0.2 ppm; Hare’s-ear
mustard, seed at 0.2 ppm; Jojoba,
refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Jojoba, seed at 0.2
ppm; Lesquerella, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Lunaria, seed at 0.2 pm; Meadowfoam,
seed at 0.2 ppm; Milkweed, seed at 0.2
ppm; Mustard, seed at 0.2 ppm; Niger
seed, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Niger seed,
seed at 0.2 ppm; Oil radish, seed at 0.2
ppm; Okra at 0.2 ppm; Poppy, seed at
0.2 ppm; Rice, wild, grain at 1.5 ppm;
Rose hip, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Rose
hip, seed at 0.2 ppm; Safflower, seed at
0.2 ppm; Sesame, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Stokes aster, refined oil at 0.4 ppm;
Stokes aster, seed at 0.2 ppm; Sweet
rocket, seed at 0.2 ppm; Tallowwood,
refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Tallowwood,
seed at 0.2 ppm; Tea oil plant, refined
oil at 0.4 ppm; Tea oil plant, seed at 0.2
ppm; Vernonia, refined oil at 0.4 ppm;
and Vernonia, seed at 0.2 ppm. EPA’s
assessment of exposures and risks
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1519
associated with establishing the
tolerance follows.
Zeta-cypermethrin is an enriched
version of the synthetic pyrethroid
insecticide cypermethrin. Cypermethrin
[(±) a-cyano-(3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl
(±)-cis, trans-3-(2,2-dichloroethenyl)-2,2dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate] is a
racemic mixture of eight isomers (each
with percentages of 11-14%). Zetacypermethrin consists primarily of the
four isomers with the ‘‘S’’ configuration
at the cyano-bearing carbon. While
cypermethrin and zeta-cypermethrin are
separate active ingredients, each
registered in separate end-use products,
they are considered together in this risk
assessment due to the close similarity of
their uses, toxicity, and chemical
characteristics.
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 cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin as
well as the no-observed-adverse-effectlevel (NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in the document
Zeta-cypermethrin: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Section 3 Use of Zetacypermethrin on Citrus (Crop Group 10),
Oilseeds (proposed Crop Group 20,
except cottonseed), Safflower, Wild Rice
and Okra. The referenced document is
available in the docket established by
this action, which is described under
ADDRESSES and is identified as
document ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2007–0300-0006 in that docket.
The toxicity data for zetacypermethrin indicate one major target
for this chemical: the neuromuscular
system. There may be some liver effects
as well; however, these may be an
adaptive response. The neuromuscular
effects (tremors, gait abnormalities, and
decreases in motor activity) occur
mainly in oral studies in the dog and the
rat. Similar effects were observed in a
rat inhalation study conducted with
cypermethrin. As with other
pyrethroids, the neuromuscular effects
appear to be transient acute effects and
do not appear to increase in severity
with increasing duration of exposure.
Studies on zeta-cypermethrin, in
addition to those on cypermethrin,
E:\FR\FM\09JAR1.SGM
09JAR1
1520
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
show that it is not a developmental or
reproductive toxicant. In the prenatal
developmental toxicity studies in rats
and rabbits, there was no evidence of
developmental toxicity up to the highest
dose tested. Maternal toxicity was
observed in these studies in the form of
decreased body weight gain and food
consumption and/or clinical signs of
neurotoxicity such as gait abnormalities.
In the multi-generation reproduction
studies in rats, offspring toxicity was
observed at the same treatment level
that resulted in parental systemic
toxicity. There did not appear to be any
increases in severity of toxicity for the
pups in these studies. In the
developmental neurotoxicity (DNT)
study, there was limited evidence of
increased susceptibility of the offspring.
No toxicity was observed in the
maternal animals at the highest dose
tested, while decreased body weight,
decreased subsession motor activity,
and changes in brain morphometry were
seen in the offspring at this same dose.
With the available toxicity database at
this time, there is no evidence of
endocrine disruption.
EPA has classified cypermethrin/zetacypermethrin as a possible human
carcinogen, based on an increased
incidence of lung adenomas and
combined adenomas plus carcinomas in
female mice. The presence of common
benign tumors (lung adenomas) in one
species (mice) and one sex (female),
with no increase in the proportion of
malignant tumors or decrease in the
time-to-tumor occurrence, together with
the lack of mutagenic activity, was not
considered strong enough evidence to
warrant a quantitative estimation of
human cancer risk. The point-ofdeparture selected for deriving the
chronic reference dose will account for
all chronic effects as well as potential
cancer effects.
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 no adverse effects are observed
(the NOAEL) in the toxicology study
identified as appropriate for use in risk
assessment. However, if a NOAEL
cannot be determined, the lowest dose
at which adverse effects of concern are
identified (the LOAEL) is sometimes
used for risk assessment. Uncertainty/
safety factors (UFs) 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 Jan 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
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 UFs. Short-, intermediate-,
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
factors (UFs) 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/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for zeta-cypermethrin/
cypermethrin used for human risk
assessment can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov at pages 25-26 in
the document Zeta-cypermethrin:
Human Health Risk Assessment for
Section 3 Use of Zeta-cypermethrin on
Citrus (Crop Group 10), Oilseeds
(proposed Crop Group 20, except
cottonseed), Safflower, Wild Rice and
Okra in docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2007–0300.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to cypermethrin/zetacypermethrin, EPA considered exposure
under the petitioned-for tolerances as
well as all existing cypermethrin/zetacypermethrin tolerances in 40 CFR
180.418. Cypermethrin and zetacypermethrin are registered for use on
some of the same commodities;
however, when both are applied to the
same crop in the same year, the
maximum seasonal rate may not exceed
the maximum seasonal rate for
cypermethrin when used alone.
Therefore, EPA has not assumed that
residues of both cypermethrin and zetacypermethrin would appear on the same
crop. EPA assessed dietary exposures
from cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin 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
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
occurring as a result of a 1–day or single
exposure.
In estimating acute dietary exposure,
EPA used food consumption
information from the U.S. 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. For crops with both
cypermethrin and zeta-cypermethrin
tolerances, the higher of the two
tolerances was assumed.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998
CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA
calculated anticipated residues for most
commodities. Anticipated residues were
based on USDA Pesticide Data Program
(PDP) monitoring data or crop field trial
data and in many cases were further
adjusted to reflect actual percent crop
treated (PCT) estimates. For crops with
both cypermethrin and zetacypermethrin registrations, the higher of
the two PCT estimates was assumed.
EPA assumed 100 PCT for all of the new
uses. Anticipated residues were
calculated for livestock commodities
using the residue data from livestock
feeding studies in conjunction with
anticipated dietary burdens from
consumption of cypermethrin/zetacypermethrin treated feed items.
Projected PCT (PPCT) estimates were
used in these calculations for certain
recently registered feed items (alfalfa
hay, other hay and pasture/rangeland
grasses), since reliable PCT estimates
based on historical usage are not yet
available.
iii. Cancer. As discussed above in
Unit III.A., EPA has classified
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin as a
possible human carcinogen (Group C),
based on an increased incidence of lung
adenomas and combined adenomas plus
carcinomas in female mice. EPA
determined that the Chronic Reference
Dose (cRfD) would be protective of any
cancer risk posed by zeta-cypermethrin
because the cRfD of 0.06 milligrams/
kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) (based on a
NOAEL of 6 mg/kg/day) used for risk
assessment is significantly lower than
the dose of 1,600 ppm (approximately
229 mg/kg/day) at which tumors were
observed; the NOAEL for tumor
induction is 400 ppm (approximately 57
mg/kg/day). EPA also took into account
that the benign tumors (lung adenomas)
were observed in one species (mice) and
one sex (female), with no increase in the
proportion of malignant tumors or
decrease in the time-to-tumor
E:\FR\FM\09JAR1.SGM
09JAR1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
occurrence. Together with the lack of
mutagenic activity, there was not strong
enough evidence to warrant a
quantitative estimation of human cancer
risk. Therefore, the cRfD is considered
protective of both non-cancer and
cancer effects and a separate cancer
exposure assessment was not
conducted.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. Section
408(b)(2)(E) of 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 residues that have
been measured in food. If EPA relies on
such information, EPA must pursuant to
FFDCA 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. For the present action, EPA
will issue such data call-ins as are
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E)
and authorized under FFDCA section
408(f)(1). Data 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:
• Condition 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.
• Condition b. The exposure estimate
does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group.
• Condition 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
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may
require registrants to submit data on
PCT.
The Agency used PCT information in
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
as follows:
PCT estimates for existing uses:
broccoli 6%, cabbage 3%, carrots 1%,
cauliflower 13%, collards 9%, celery
1%, corn (field and sweet) <1%, cotton
5%, garlic 13%, kale 13%, lettuce (head
and leaf) 26%, mustard greens 8%,
onions 15%, peanuts <1%, pecans 9%,
sorghum <1%, soybeans <1%, spinach
2%, tomato 1%, turnip greens 4% and
wheat <1%.
EPA uses an average PCT for chronic
dietary risk analysis. The average PCT
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 Jan 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
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 5% except for those
situations in which the average PCT is
less than one. In those cases <1% is
used as the average. In most cases, EPA
uses available data from U. S.
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 6 years.
EPA used Projected PCT (PPCT)
estimates for animal feed items: alfalfa
hay 3%, other hay 1% and pasture/
rangeland <1%.
EPA estimates PPCT for a new
pesticide use by assuming that the PCT
during the pesticide’s initial 5 years of
use on a specific use site will not exceed
the average PCT of the market leader
(i.e., the one with the greatest PCT) on
that site over the three most recent
surveys. Comparisons are only made
among pesticides of the same pesticide
types (i.e., the dominant insecticide on
the use site is selected for comparison
with the new insecticide). The PCTs
included in the average may be each for
the same pesticide or for different
pesticides since the same or different
pesticides may dominate for each year
selected. Typically, EPA uses USDA/
NASS as the source for the PCT data
because they are publicly available.
When a specific use site is not surveyed
by USDA/NASS, EPA uses proprietary
data and calculates the estimated PCT.
This estimated PPCT, based on the
average PCT of the market leader, is
appropriate for use in the chronic
dietary risk assessment. This method of
estimating a PPCT for a new use of a
registered pesticide or a new pesticide
produces a high-end estimate that is
unlikely, in most cases, to be exceeded
during the initial 5 years of actual use.
Predominant factors that bear on
whether the estimated PPCT for these
three crops could be exceeded include
pest resistance concerns, relative
efficacies, pest prevalence and other
factors. All such relevant information
that is currently available to EPA has
been considered for zeta-cypermethrin
on alfalfa hay, other hay and pasture/
rangeland. It is unlikely that the actual
PCT for zeta-cypermethrin will exceed
the estimated PPCT for this chemical on
each of these three sites during the next
5 years.
The Agency believes that the three
conditions listed in this Unit have been
met. With respect to Condition a, PCT
estimates are derived from Federal and
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1521
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 b and c, 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
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin 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
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin 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
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin.
Further information regarding EPA’s
drinking water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at
https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/
water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCIGROW) models, the estimated
environmental concentrations (EECs) of
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin for
acute exposures are estimated to be 1.04
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water
and 0.0036 ppb for ground water. The
EECs for chronic exposures are
estimated to be 0.013 ppb for surface
water and 0.0036 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 1.04 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
E:\FR\FM\09JAR1.SGM
09JAR1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
1522
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
value 0.013 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).
Cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin is
currently registered for the following
residential non-dietary sites: as an
indoor surface or spot/crack and crevice
treatment; and as a granular broadcast or
spot application for lawns. EPA
assessed residential exposure using the
following assumptions:
There is a potential for short- and
intermediate-term dermal and
inhalation exposure of homeowners
applying products containing
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin in
indoor (surface or crack and crevice
treatments) and outdoor (lawn
treatment) settings. The outdoor use on
lawns, considered the worst case
residential handler exposure scenario,
was used to assess residential handler
exposure and risk. A dermal endpoint of
concern for adults was not identified in
the toxicology database for
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin;
therefore, only the inhalation route of
exposure was assessed for residential
applicators.
There is also a potential for short- and
intermediate-term dermal and
inhalation post-application exposure of
adults and short- and intermediate-term
dermal, inhalation and incidental oral
post-application exposure of children
from entering areas treated with
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin. As
noted above, a dermal endpoint of
concern for adults was not identified in
the toxicology database for
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin. In
addition, EPA has determined in
previous residential assessments that
indoor and outdoor inhalation
exposures are negligible, due in part to
the low vapor pressure of cypermethrin/
zeta-cypermethrin; therefore, EPA only
assessed post-application dermal and
incidental oral exposure of children to
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin in
indoor and outdoor settings.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 Jan 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
Cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin is a
member of the pyrethroid class of
pesticides. Although all pyrethroids
alter nerve function by modifying the
normal biochemistry and physiology of
nerve membrane sodium channels, EPA
is not currently following a cumulative
risk approach based on a common
mechanism of toxicity for the
pyrethroids. Although all pyrethroids
interact with sodium channels, there are
multiple types of sodium channels and
it is currently unknown whether the
pyrethroids have similar effects on all
channels. Nor do we have a clear
understanding of effects on key
downstream neuronal function e.g.,
nerve excitability, nor do we understand
how these key events interact to
produce their compound-specific
patterns of neurotoxicity. There is
ongoing research by the EPA’s Office of
Research and Development and
pyrethroid registrants to evaluate the
differential biochemical and
physiological actions of pyrethroids in
mammals. When available, the Agency
will consider this research and make a
determination of common mechanism
as a basis for assessing cumulative risk.
Information regarding EPA’s procedures
for cumulating effects from substances
found to have a common mechanism
can be found 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 (‘‘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 database 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 factors (UFs)
and/or special FQPA safety factors, as
appropriate.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
The pre- and postnatal toxicology
database for cypermethrin/zetacypermethrin includes rat and rabbit
developmental toxicity studies, a twogeneration reproduction toxicity study
in rats and a developmental
neurotoxicity (DNT) study in rats. There
was no evidence of increased
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility
of in utero rats or rabbits or offspring
following exposure to cypermethrin/
zeta-cypermethrin in the developmental
toxicity and reproduction studies.
In the DNT study, there was limited
evidence of increased susceptibility of
the offspring. No toxicity was observed
in the maternal animals at the highest
dose tested, while decreased body
weight, decreased subsession motor
activity, and changes in brain
morphometry were seen in the offspring
at this same dose. An in-depth analysis
of the effects seen in the pups revealed
that these effects were of low concern
because:
i. Body weight decreases were seen
only during late lactation (postnatal
days 13 to 21) when the pups are
potentially exposed to higher levels of
the chemical via both milk and feed.
ii. The decreases in motor activity
were not considered biologically
significant because they were seen only
in the subsession data (not in total or
ambulatory counts), only in one sex
(females), only on postnatal day 21 (not
in measurements taken at three other
time periods), and the differences did
not reach statistical significance.
iii. The sole brain morphometric
change (increased mean vertical
thickness of the cortex ) was determined
to occur in isolation, only in female
pups on day 21, and was not considered
biologically significant because when
the values of individual treated animals
were compared with individual control
animals, the incidence and magnitude
of the change suggested a low
concern.No statistically or biologically
significant changes were seen in any
other brain areas in male or female pups
at any time period.
Based on these factors, the limited
susceptibility seen in the DNT was
determined to be of low concern, and
there are no residual uncertainties for
pre- and/or postnatal neurotoxicity.
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
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin is
complete.
ii. There is no evidence that
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin results
in increased qualitative or quantitative
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the 2–generation
reproduction study.
iii. Although there is limited evidence
of increased susceptibility of the
offspring in the DNT study, the degree
E:\FR\FM\09JAR1.SGM
09JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
of concern for pre- and/or postnatal
toxicity is low and the Agency did not
identify any residual uncertainties after
establishing toxicity endpoints and
traditional UFs to be used in the risk
assessment.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The acute dietary food exposure
assessment utilizes tolerance level
residues and 100 PCT. The chronic
dietary food exposure assessment
utilizes anticipated residues that are
based on reliable field trial or PDP
monitoring data. The chronic
assessment also utilizes PCT data for
many registered commodities that have
been verified by the Agency, as well as
high-end PPCT estimates for animal
feed items that are unlikely to be
exceeded during the next 5 years.
Conservative ground and surface water
modeling estimates were used.
Similarly, conservative residential SOPs
were used to assess post-application
exposure of children as well as
incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by cypermethrin/zetacypermethrin.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
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 UFs. For linear cancer risks,
EPA calculates the probability of
additional cancer cases given aggregate
exposure. Short-, intermediate-, 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 UFs 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
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin will
occupy 53% of the aPAD for children,
1 to 2 years old, the population group
receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that exposure to cypermethrin/zetacypermethrin from food and water will
utilize 3.0% of the cPAD for children,
1 to 2 years old, the population group
with the greatest estimated exposure.
Based on the use pattern, chronic
residential exposure to residues of
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin is not
expected.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 Jan 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk.
Short-term and intermediate-term
aggregate exposure take into account
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin is
currently registered for uses that could
result in short- and intermediate-term
residential exposures and the Agency
has determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic food and water and
short- or intermediate-term exposures
for cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin.
Since the cypermethrin/zetacypermethrin endpoints and points of
departure (NOAELs) are identical for
short- and intermediate-term exposures,
in this case the aggregate MOEs for
short- and intermediate-term exposure
are the same.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term and
intermediate-term exposures, EPA has
concluded that food, water, and
residential exposures aggregated result
in aggregate MOEs of 7,500 for the
overall U.S. population and 8,600 for
females 13 to 49 years old, using
handler exposure estimates based on
indoor surface uses of cypermethrin/
zeta-cypermethrin. Aggregate MOEs for
infants and children are estimated to be
220 and 160, respectively, based on
post-application exposures following
indoor surface treatments with
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin. The
indoor surface treatment scenario was
used in the aggregate assessment, since
this scenario resulted in the highest
estimated exposures and is, therefore,
protective of all post-application
exposures. These aggregate MOEs do not
exceed the Agency’s level of concern for
aggregate exposure to food, water and
residential uses.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Cypermethrin/zetacypermethrin has been classified as a
‘‘Group C’’ (possible human)
carcinogen, based on an increased
incidence of lung adenomas and
combined adenomas plus carcinomas in
female mice. As explained above, risk
assessments based on the endpoint
selected for the chronic population
adjusted dose (cPAD) are considered to
be protective of any potential
carcinogenic risk from exposure to
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin. Based
on the results of the chronic risk
assessment discussed above in Unit
III.E.2., EPA concludes that
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin 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
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1523
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement analytical
methodology for cypermethrin and zetacypermethrin residues is available in
PAM Volume II. PAM Volume II lists
Methods I and II for the determination
of residues of cypermethrin per se in or
on plant and livestock commodities,
respectively. Both are gas
chromatography (GC) methods with
electron capture detection and have
undergone successful Agency method
tryout. Method I has a detection limit of
0.01 ppm and Method II has detection
limits of 0.005 ppm for milk and 0.01
ppm for livestock tissues. These
methods are not stereo-specific; thus, no
distinction is made between residues of
cypermethrin (all eight stereoisomers)
and zeta-cypermethrin (an enriched
isomer form of cypermethrin).
B. International Residue Limits
There are no specific Codex
maximum residue limits (MRLs) for
zeta-cypermethrin, but there are Codex
MRLs for cypermethrin. Codex has an
MRL of 2.0 ppm for cypermethrin on
citrus, an MRL of 0.2 ppm on oilseeds
and an MRL of 0.5 ppm on edible
vegetable oils. The 0.2 ppm U.S.
tolerances on safflower and other
oilseeds are harmonized numerically
with the current Codex MRL of 0.2 mg/
kg on oilseeds, although the latter is
based on cypermethrin instead of zetacypermethrin. EPA is not
recommending an increase in the U.S.
citrus tolerance of 0.35 ppm or the
tolerance on refined oils of 0.4 ppm to
harmonize numerically with the Codex
MRLs on citrus and edible vegetable
oils, because the latter are expressed in
terms of cypermethrin, which requires
higher application rates and residues
than zeta-cypermethrin to be
efficacious.
C. Response to Comments
Comments were received from a
private citizen objecting to the sale of
zeta-cypermethrin anywhere in this
country on the basis that it is a
‘‘possible human carcinogen’’. EPA
considered the carcinogenic potential of
zeta-cypermethrin in its risk assessment
and determined that it did not pose a
cancer risk. Comments received
contained no scientific data or other
substantive evidence to rebut this
conclusion or the Agency’s finding that
there is a reasonable certainty that no
E:\FR\FM\09JAR1.SGM
09JAR1
1524
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
harm will result from aggregate
exposure to cypermethrin/zetacypermethrin from the establishment of
these tolerances. The Agency has
received these same or similar
comments from this commenter on
numerous previous occasions. Refer to
70 FR 37686 (June 30, 2005), 70 FR 1354
(January 7, 2005), and 69 FR 6309663098 (October 29, 2004) for the
Agency’s previous responses to these
objections.
V. Conclusion
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petitions, EPA has
modified the proposed tolerances as
follows: (1) Increased the tolerance level
for Fruit, citrus, group 10 from 0.25 ppm
to 0.35 ppm; for Citrus, dried pulp from
0.5 ppm to 1.8 ppm; and for Citrus, oil
from 0.9 ppm to 4.0 ppm; and (2)
Determined that a separate, higher
tolerance of 0.4 ppm should be
established for specific refined oils. EPA
revised these tolerance levels 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
and the results of citrus and oilseed
processing studies. EPA also revised the
commodity term for Safflower to read
‘‘Safflower, seed’’ to agree with the
recommended commodity term in the
Office of Pesticide Program’s Food and
Feed Commodity Vocabulary.
Therefore, tolerances are established
for combined residues of zetacypermethrin, S-cyano(3phenoxyphenyl)methyl(±)(cis-trans 3(2,2-dichloroethenyl)-2,2dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and
its inactive R-isomers, in or on Borage,
seed at 0.2 ppm; Castor oil plant, refined
oil at 0.4 ppm; Castor oil plant, seed at
0.2 ppm; Chinese tallowtree, refined oil
at 0.4 ppm; Chinese tallowtree, seed at
0.2 ppm; Citrus, dried pulp at 1.8 ppm;
Citrus, oil at 4.0 ppm; Crambe, seed at
0.2 ppm; Cuphea, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Echium, seed at 0.2 ppm; Euphorbia,
refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Euphorbia, seed
at 0.2 ppm; Evening primrose, refined
oil at 0.4 ppm; Evening primrose, seed
at 0.2 ppm; Flax, seed at 0.2 ppm; Fruit,
citrus, group 10 at 0.35 ppm; Gold of
pleasure, seed at 0.2 ppm; Hare’s-ear
mustard, seed at 0.2 ppm; Jojoba,
refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Jojoba, seed at 0.2
ppm; Lesquerella, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Lunaria, seed at 0.2 pm; Meadowfoam,
seed at 0.2 ppm; Milkweed, seed at 0.2
ppm; Mustard, seed at 0.2 ppm; Niger
seed, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Niger seed,
seed at 0.2 ppm; Oil radish, seed at 0.2
ppm; Okra at 0.2 ppm; Poppy, seed at
0.2 ppm; Rice, wild, grain at 1.5 ppm;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 Jan 08, 2008
Jkt 214001
Rose hip, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Rose
hip, seed at 0.2 ppm; Safflower, seed at
0.2 ppm; Sesame, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Stokes aster, refined oil at 0.4 ppm;
Stokes aster, seed at 0.2 ppm; Sweet
rocket, seed at 0.2 ppm; Tallowwood,
refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Tallowwood,
seed at 0.2 ppm; Tea oil plant, refined
oil at 0.4 ppm; Tea oil plant, seed at 0.2
ppm; Vernonia, refined oil at 0.4 ppm;
and Vernonia, seed at 0.2 ppm.
Time-limited tolerances were
established at 40 CFR 180.418(b) for
residues of zeta-cypermethrin in or on
flax, meal and seed in connection with
FIFRA section 18 emergency
exemptions granted by EPA. These timelimited tolerances are no longer
necessary, because a permanent
tolerance is being established for flax at
the same level. Therefore, these timelimited tolerances for residues of zetacypermethrin are revoked.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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: December 20, 2007.
Lois Rossi
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
E:\FR\FM\09JAR1.SGM
09JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 6 / Wednesday, January 9, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
PART 180—[AMENDED]
Parts per million
Commodity
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 180.418 is amended by
alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table in paragraph
(a)(2) and removing the text from
paragraph (b) and reserving the
paragraph designation and heading to
read as follows:
I
§ 180.418 Cypermethrin and an isomer
zeta-cypermethrin; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Commodity
*
*
*
Borage, seed ........................
*
*
*
Castor oil plant, refined oil ...
Castor oil plant, seed ...........
*
*
*
Chinese tallowtree, refined
oil .......................................
Chinese tallowtree, seed ......
*
*
*
Citrus, dried pulp ..................
Citrus, oil ...............................
*
*
*
Crambe, seed .......................
Cuphea, seed .......................
Echium, seed ........................
*
*
*
Euphorbia, refined oil ...........
Euphorbia, seed ...................
Evening primrose, refined oil
Evening primrose, seed ........
Flax, seed .............................
*
*
*
Fruit, citrus, group 10 ...........
*
*
*
Gold of pleasure, seed .........
*
*
*
Hare’s-ear mustard, seed .....
*
*
*
Jojoba, refined oil .................
Jojoba, seed .........................
Lesquerella, seed .................
Lunaria, seed ........................
Meadowfoam, seed ..............
*
*
*
Milkweed, seed .....................
Mustard, seed .......................
Niger seed, refined oil ..........
Niger seed, seed ..................
*
*
*
Oil radish, seed ....................
Okra ......................................
*
*
*
Poppy, seed ..........................
*
*
*
Rice, wild, grain ....................
Rose hip, refined oil .............
Rose hip, seed .....................
Safflower, seed .....................
Sesame, seed .......................
*
*
*
Stokes aster, refined oil ........
Stokes aster, seed ................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:44 Jan 08, 2008
*
*
*
Sweet rocket, seed ...............
Tallowwood, refined oil .........
Tallowwood, seed .................
Tea oil plant, refined oil ........
Tea oil plant, seed ................
*
*
*
Vernonia, refined oil .............
Vernonia, seed .....................
*
*
*
*
*
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.2
*
*
0.4
0.2
*
*
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E7–25392 Filed 1–8–08; 8:45 am]
Parts per million
*
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
*
0.2
*
*
0.4
0.2
*
*
0.4
0.2
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
*
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS–R8–ES–2007–0026; 92210–1117–
0000; ABC Code: B4]
RIN 1018–AU83
1.8
4.0
*
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Designation of Critical
*
Habitat for the Monterey Spineflower
0.2
(Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens)
0.2
*
*
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Jkt 214001
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), are
designating revised critical habitat for
the threatened Monterey spineflower
(Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens)
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act). In total,
approximately 11,055 acres (ac) (4,475
hectares (ha)) fall within the boundaries
of this revised critical habitat
designation. The revised critical habitat
is located in Santa Cruz and Monterey
counties, California.
DATES: This rule becomes effective on
February 8, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Comments and materials we
received, as well as supporting
documentation we used in the
preparation of this final rule, are
available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours at the Ventura Fish and Wildlife
Office, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B,
Ventura, CA 93003 (telephone 805–644–
1766). The final rule, economic analysis,
and more detailed maps are also
available on the Internet at https://
www.fws.gov/ventura.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Connie Rutherford, Listing and
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
0.4
0.2 ACTION: Final rule.
*
0.35
*
0.2
*
0.2
*
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
*
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.2
*
0.2
0.2
*
0.2
*
1.5
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
*
0.4
0.2
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1525
Recovery Coordinator for Plants,
Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES), (telephone 805–644–1766,
ext. 306; facsimile 805–644–3958). If
you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
It is our intent to discuss only those
topics directly relevant to the
designation of revised critical habitat in
this rule. For more detailed background
information on the appearance, seed
ecology, habitat requirements, and the
historical and current distribution of
Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens, refer
to the proposed revised critical habitat
designation published in the Federal
Register on December 14, 2006 (71 FR
75189), and the previous final
designation of critical habitat for C. p.
var. pungens published in the Federal
Register on May 29, 2002 (67 FR 37498).
Additional information on C. p. var.
pungens is also available in the final
listing rule published in the Federal
Register on February 4, 1994 (59 FR
5499).
Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens is
an annual species in the buckwheat
family (Polygonaceae). It is a lowgrowing herb that is soft-hairy and
grayish or reddish in color, with whiteto rose-colored flowers. It produces one
seed per flower, and depending on the
vigor of an individual plant, dozens to
over one hundred seeds can be
produced (Abrams 1944, F35–1; Fox et
al. 2006, pp. 162–163). Seed dispersal in
C. p. var. pungens is likely facilitated by
hooked spines on the structure
surrounding the seed. In the
Chorizanthe genus, these are believed to
attach to passing animals and disperse
seed between plant colonies and
populations (Reveal 2001, unpaginated).
Wind also disperses seed within
colonies and populations.
Previous Federal Actions
On May 29, 2002, we designated
critical habitat for Chorizanthe pungens
var. pungens on approximately 18,829
acres (ac) (7,620 hectares (ha)) of land in
Santa Cruz and Monterey counties,
California (67 FR 37498). In March
2005, the Homebuilders Association of
Northern California, et al., filed suit
against the Service (CV–013630LKK–
JFM) challenging final critical habitat
rules for several species, including
Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens. In
March 2006, a settlement was reached
that requires the Service to re-evaluate
five final critical habitat designations,
including critical habitat designated for
E:\FR\FM\09JAR1.SGM
09JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 9, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1517-1525]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-25392]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0300; FRL-8346-3]
Zeta-cypermethrin; Pesticide Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for combined residues
of zeta-cypermethrin and its inactive R-isomers in or on Citrus (dried
pulp, fruit and oil); oilseed commodities (seeds of borage, castor oil
plant, Chinese tallow tree, crambe, cuphea, echium, euphorbia, evening
primrose, flax, gold of pleasure, hare's-ear mustard, jojoba,
[[Page 1518]]
lesquerella, lunaria, meadowfoam, milkweed, mustard, niger seed, oil
radish, poppy, rose hip, sesame, Stokes aster, sweet rocket,
tallowwood, tea oil plant, and vernonia); oilseed, refined oils
(refined oils of castor oil plant, Chinese tallowtree, euphorbia,
evening primrose, jojoba, niger seed, rose hip, stokes aster,
tallowwood, tea oil plant and vernonia); okra; rice, wild; and
safflower, seed. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4)
requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA). This regulation also deletes time-limited flax seed
tolerances which are made redundant and unnecessary by establishment of
the permanent tolerance on flax seed.
DATES: This regulation is effective January 9, 2008. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before March 10, 2008, 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-2007-0300. 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 website 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: Susan Stanton, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-5218; e-mail address: stanton.susan@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 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-2007-0300 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 March 10, 2008.
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-2007-0300, 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.
II. Petition for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of June 27, 2007 (72 FR 35237-35242) (FRL-
8133-4), 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
6E7132 and PP 6E7133) by Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-
4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540-6635. The
petitions requested that 40 CFR 180.418 be amended by establishing
tolerances for combined residues of the insecticide zeta-cypermethrin,
S-cyano(3-phenoxyphenyl) methyl ()-cis-trans 3-(2,2-
dichloroethenyl)-2,2 dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and its inactive
R-isomers, in or on the following food commodities: PP 6E7132 - Rice,
wild, grain at 1.50 parts per million (ppm); okra at 0.20 ppm;
[[Page 1519]]
safflower, seed at 0.20 ppm; and PP 6E7133 - Fruit, citrus, group 10 at
0.25 ppm; citrus, dried, pulp at 0.50 ppm; and citrus, oil at 0.90 ppm.
That notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by FMC
Corporation, 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.
In the Federal Register of October 24, 2007 (72 FR 60369-60371)
(FRL-8150-8), 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 7E7255) by Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4),
500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540-6635. The
petition requested that 40 CFR 180.418 be amended by establishing
tolerances for combined residues of the insecticide zeta-cypermethrin,
S-cyano(3-phenoxyphenyl) methyl ()-cis-trans 3-(2,2-
dichloroethenyl)-2,2 dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and its inactive
R-isomers, at 0.2 ppm in or on the following commodities: borage, seed;
castor oil plant, seed; Chinese tallowtree, seed; crambe, seed; cuphea,
seed; echium, seed; euphorbia, seed; evening primrose, seed; flax,
seed; gold of pleasure, seed; hare's ear mustard, seed; jojoba, seed;
lesquerella, seed; lunaria, seed; meadowfoam, seed; milkweed, seed;
mustard, seed; niger seed, seed; oil radish, seed; poppy, seed; rose
hip, seed; sesame, seed; Stokes aster, seed; sweet rocket, seed;
tallowwood, seed; tea oil plant, seed; and vernonia, seed. That notice
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by FMC Corporation, the
registrant, which is available to the public in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. Comments were received from a private citizen on
the notice of filing. EPA's response to these comments is discussed in
Unit IV.C. below.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
revised the tolerance levels for citrus commodities and determined that
a separate tolerance is needed for refined oils derived from several of
the proposed oilseed crops. The reason for these changes is explained
in Unit V.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
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....'' These provisions were added to FFDCA by the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA 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 tolerance
for combined residues of zeta-cypermethrin and its inactive R-isomers
on Borage, seed at 0.2 ppm; Castor oil plant, refined oil at 0.4 ppm;
Castor oil plant, seed at 0.2 ppm; Chinese tallowtree, refined oil at
0.4 ppm; Chinese tallowtree, seed at 0.2 ppm; Citrus, dried pulp at 1.8
ppm; Citrus, oil at 4.0 ppm; Crambe, seed at 0.2 ppm; Cuphea, seed at
0.2 ppm; Echium, seed at 0.2 ppm; Euphorbia, refined oil at 0.4 ppm;
Euphorbia, seed at 0.2 ppm; Evening primrose, refined oil at 0.4 ppm;
Evening primrose, seed at 0.2 ppm; Flax, seed at 0.2 ppm; Fruit,
citrus, group 10 at 0.35 ppm; Gold of pleasure, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Hare's-ear mustard, seed at 0.2 ppm; Jojoba, refined oil at 0.4 ppm;
Jojoba, seed at 0.2 ppm; Lesquerella, seed at 0.2 ppm; Lunaria, seed at
0.2 pm; Meadowfoam, seed at 0.2 ppm; Milkweed, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Mustard, seed at 0.2 ppm; Niger seed, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Niger
seed, seed at 0.2 ppm; Oil radish, seed at 0.2 ppm; Okra at 0.2 ppm;
Poppy, seed at 0.2 ppm; Rice, wild, grain at 1.5 ppm; Rose hip, refined
oil at 0.4 ppm; Rose hip, seed at 0.2 ppm; Safflower, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Sesame, seed at 0.2 ppm; Stokes aster, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Stokes
aster, seed at 0.2 ppm; Sweet rocket, seed at 0.2 ppm; Tallowwood,
refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Tallowwood, seed at 0.2 ppm; Tea oil plant,
refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Tea oil plant, seed at 0.2 ppm; Vernonia,
refined oil at 0.4 ppm; and Vernonia, seed at 0.2 ppm. EPA's assessment
of exposures and risks associated with establishing the tolerance
follows.
Zeta-cypermethrin is an enriched version of the synthetic
pyrethroid insecticide cypermethrin. Cypermethrin [()
[alpha]-cyano-(3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl ()-cis, trans-3-(2,2-
dichloroethenyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate] is a racemic
mixture of eight isomers (each with percentages of 11-14%). Zeta-
cypermethrin consists primarily of the four isomers with the ``S''
configuration at the cyano-bearing carbon. While cypermethrin and zeta-
cypermethrin are separate active ingredients, each registered in
separate end-use products, they are considered together in this risk
assessment due to the close similarity of their uses, toxicity, and
chemical characteristics.
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 cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin as well
as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-
observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be
found at https://www.regulations.gov in the document Zeta-cypermethrin:
Human Health Risk Assessment for Section 3 Use of Zeta-cypermethrin on
Citrus (Crop Group 10), Oilseeds (proposed Crop Group 20, except
cottonseed), Safflower, Wild Rice and Okra. The referenced document is
available in the docket established by this action, which is described
under ADDRESSES and is identified as document ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2007-0300-0006 in that docket.
The toxicity data for zeta-cypermethrin indicate one major target
for this chemical: the neuromuscular system. There may be some liver
effects as well; however, these may be an adaptive response. The
neuromuscular effects (tremors, gait abnormalities, and decreases in
motor activity) occur mainly in oral studies in the dog and the rat.
Similar effects were observed in a rat inhalation study conducted with
cypermethrin. As with other pyrethroids, the neuromuscular effects
appear to be transient acute effects and do not appear to increase in
severity with increasing duration of exposure.
Studies on zeta-cypermethrin, in addition to those on cypermethrin,
[[Page 1520]]
show that it is not a developmental or reproductive toxicant. In the
prenatal developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits, there was
no evidence of developmental toxicity up to the highest dose tested.
Maternal toxicity was observed in these studies in the form of
decreased body weight gain and food consumption and/or clinical signs
of neurotoxicity such as gait abnormalities. In the multi-generation
reproduction studies in rats, offspring toxicity was observed at the
same treatment level that resulted in parental systemic toxicity. There
did not appear to be any increases in severity of toxicity for the pups
in these studies. In the developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) study, there
was limited evidence of increased susceptibility of the offspring. No
toxicity was observed in the maternal animals at the highest dose
tested, while decreased body weight, decreased subsession motor
activity, and changes in brain morphometry were seen in the offspring
at this same dose. With the available toxicity database at this time,
there is no evidence of endocrine disruption.
EPA has classified cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin as a possible
human carcinogen, based on an increased incidence of lung adenomas and
combined adenomas plus carcinomas in female mice. The presence of
common benign tumors (lung adenomas) in one species (mice) and one sex
(female), with no increase in the proportion of malignant tumors or
decrease in the time-to-tumor occurrence, together with the lack of
mutagenic activity, was not considered strong enough evidence to
warrant a quantitative estimation of human cancer risk. The point-of-
departure selected for deriving the chronic reference dose will account
for all chronic effects as well as potential cancer effects.
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 no adverse effects are observed (the
NOAEL) in the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use in
risk assessment. However, if a NOAEL cannot be determined, the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified (the LOAEL) is
sometimes used for risk assessment. Uncertainty/safety factors (UFs)
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 UFs. Short-, intermediate-, 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 factors (UFs) 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/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for zeta-cypermethrin/
cypermethrin used for human risk assessment can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov at pages 25-26 in the document Zeta-cypermethrin:
Human Health Risk Assessment for Section 3 Use of Zeta-cypermethrin on
Citrus (Crop Group 10), Oilseeds (proposed Crop Group 20, except
cottonseed), Safflower, Wild Rice and Okra in docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2007-0300.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin, EPA considered exposure
under the petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin tolerances in 40 CFR 180.418.
Cypermethrin and zeta-cypermethrin are registered for use on some of
the same commodities; however, when both are applied to the same crop
in the same year, the maximum seasonal rate may not exceed the maximum
seasonal rate for cypermethrin when used alone. Therefore, EPA has not
assumed that residues of both cypermethrin and zeta-cypermethrin would
appear on the same crop. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin 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 U.S. 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.
For crops with both cypermethrin and zeta-cypermethrin tolerances, the
higher of the two tolerances was assumed.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA calculated
anticipated residues for most commodities. Anticipated residues were
based on USDA Pesticide Data Program (PDP) monitoring data or crop
field trial data and in many cases were further adjusted to reflect
actual percent crop treated (PCT) estimates. For crops with both
cypermethrin and zeta-cypermethrin registrations, the higher of the two
PCT estimates was assumed. EPA assumed 100 PCT for all of the new uses.
Anticipated residues were calculated for livestock commodities using
the residue data from livestock feeding studies in conjunction with
anticipated dietary burdens from consumption of cypermethrin/zeta-
cypermethrin treated feed items. Projected PCT (PPCT) estimates were
used in these calculations for certain recently registered feed items
(alfalfa hay, other hay and pasture/rangeland grasses), since reliable
PCT estimates based on historical usage are not yet available.
iii. Cancer. As discussed above in Unit III.A., EPA has classified
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin as a possible human carcinogen (Group
C), based on an increased incidence of lung adenomas and combined
adenomas plus carcinomas in female mice. EPA determined that the
Chronic Reference Dose (cRfD) would be protective of any cancer risk
posed by zeta-cypermethrin because the cRfD of 0.06 milligrams/
kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) (based on a NOAEL of 6 mg/kg/day) used for
risk assessment is significantly lower than the dose of 1,600 ppm
(approximately 229 mg/kg/day) at which tumors were observed; the NOAEL
for tumor induction is 400 ppm (approximately 57 mg/kg/day). EPA also
took into account that the benign tumors (lung adenomas) were observed
in one species (mice) and one sex (female), with no increase in the
proportion of malignant tumors or decrease in the time-to-tumor
[[Page 1521]]
occurrence. Together with the lack of mutagenic activity, there was not
strong enough evidence to warrant a quantitative estimation of human
cancer risk. Therefore, the cRfD is considered protective of both non-
cancer and cancer effects and a separate cancer exposure assessment was
not conducted.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of 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 residues that have been
measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must pursuant
to FFDCA 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. For the present action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data 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:
Condition 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.
Condition b. The exposure estimate does not underestimate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
Condition 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 FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require registrants to submit
data on PCT.
The Agency used PCT information in the chronic dietary exposure
assessment as follows:
PCT estimates for existing uses: broccoli 6%, cabbage 3%, carrots
1%, cauliflower 13%, collards 9%, celery 1%, corn (field and sweet)
<1%, cotton 5%, garlic 13%, kale 13%, lettuce (head and leaf) 26%,
mustard greens 8%, onions 15%, peanuts <1%, pecans 9%, sorghum <1%,
soybeans <1%, spinach 2%, tomato 1%, turnip greens 4% and wheat <1%.
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 5% except for those situations in which the average
PCT is less than one. In those cases <1% is used as the average. In
most cases, EPA uses available data from U. S. 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 6 years.
EPA used Projected PCT (PPCT) estimates for animal feed items:
alfalfa hay 3%, other hay 1% and pasture/rangeland <1%.
EPA estimates PPCT for a new pesticide use by assuming that the PCT
during the pesticide's initial 5 years of use on a specific use site
will not exceed the average PCT of the market leader (i.e., the one
with the greatest PCT) on that site over the three most recent surveys.
Comparisons are only made among pesticides of the same pesticide types
(i.e., the dominant insecticide on the use site is selected for
comparison with the new insecticide). The PCTs included in the average
may be each for the same pesticide or for different pesticides since
the same or different pesticides may dominate for each year selected.
Typically, EPA uses USDA/NASS as the source for the PCT data because
they are publicly available. When a specific use site is not surveyed
by USDA/NASS, EPA uses proprietary data and calculates the estimated
PCT.
This estimated PPCT, based on the average PCT of the market leader,
is appropriate for use in the chronic dietary risk assessment. This
method of estimating a PPCT for a new use of a registered pesticide or
a new pesticide produces a high-end estimate that is unlikely, in most
cases, to be exceeded during the initial 5 years of actual use.
Predominant factors that bear on whether the estimated PPCT for these
three crops could be exceeded include pest resistance concerns,
relative efficacies, pest prevalence and other factors. All such
relevant information that is currently available to EPA has been
considered for zeta-cypermethrin on alfalfa hay, other hay and pasture/
rangeland. It is unlikely that the actual PCT for zeta-cypermethrin
will exceed the estimated PPCT for this chemical on each of these three
sites during the next 5 years.
The Agency believes that the three conditions listed in this Unit
have been met. With respect to Condition a, 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 b and c, 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 cypermethrin/
zeta-cypermethrin 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 cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin 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 cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin.
Further information regarding EPA's drinking water models used in
pesticide exposure assessment can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) of
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin for acute exposures are estimated to be
1.04 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.0036 ppb for
ground water. The EECs for chronic exposures are estimated to be 0.013
ppb for surface water and 0.0036 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 1.04 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
[[Page 1522]]
value 0.013 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).
Cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin is currently registered for the
following residential non-dietary sites: as an indoor surface or spot/
crack and crevice treatment; and as a granular broadcast or spot
application for lawns. EPA assessed residential exposure using the
following assumptions:
There is a potential for short- and intermediate-term dermal and
inhalation exposure of homeowners applying products containing
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin in indoor (surface or crack and crevice
treatments) and outdoor (lawn treatment) settings. The outdoor use on
lawns, considered the worst case residential handler exposure scenario,
was used to assess residential handler exposure and risk. A dermal
endpoint of concern for adults was not identified in the toxicology
database for cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin; therefore, only the
inhalation route of exposure was assessed for residential applicators.
There is also a potential for short- and intermediate-term dermal
and inhalation post-application exposure of adults and short- and
intermediate-term dermal, inhalation and incidental oral post-
application exposure of children from entering areas treated with
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin. As noted above, a dermal endpoint of
concern for adults was not identified in the toxicology database for
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin. In addition, EPA has determined in
previous residential assessments that indoor and outdoor inhalation
exposures are negligible, due in part to the low vapor pressure of
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin; therefore, EPA only assessed post-
application dermal and incidental oral exposure of children to
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin in indoor and outdoor settings.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
Cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin is a member of the pyrethroid class
of pesticides. Although all pyrethroids alter nerve function by
modifying the normal biochemistry and physiology of nerve membrane
sodium channels, EPA is not currently following a cumulative risk
approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity for the pyrethroids.
Although all pyrethroids interact with sodium channels, there are
multiple types of sodium channels and it is currently unknown whether
the pyrethroids have similar effects on all channels. Nor do we have a
clear understanding of effects on key downstream neuronal function
e.g., nerve excitability, nor do we understand how these key events
interact to produce their compound-specific patterns of neurotoxicity.
There is ongoing research by the EPA's Office of Research and
Development and pyrethroid registrants to evaluate the differential
biochemical and physiological actions of pyrethroids in mammals. When
available, the Agency will consider this research and make a
determination of common mechanism as a basis for assessing cumulative
risk. Information regarding EPA's procedures for cumulating effects
from substances found to have a common mechanism can be found 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 (``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 database 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 factors
(UFs) and/or special FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The pre- and postnatal
toxicology database for cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin includes rat and
rabbit developmental toxicity studies, a two-generation reproduction
toxicity study in rats and a developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) study in
rats. There was no evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative
susceptibility of in utero rats or rabbits or offspring following
exposure to cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin in the developmental
toxicity and reproduction studies.
In the DNT study, there was limited evidence of increased
susceptibility of the offspring. No toxicity was observed in the
maternal animals at the highest dose tested, while decreased body
weight, decreased subsession motor activity, and changes in brain
morphometry were seen in the offspring at this same dose. An in-depth
analysis of the effects seen in the pups revealed that these effects
were of low concern because:
i. Body weight decreases were seen only during late lactation
(postnatal days 13 to 21) when the pups are potentially exposed to
higher levels of the chemical via both milk and feed.
ii. The decreases in motor activity were not considered
biologically significant because they were seen only in the subsession
data (not in total or ambulatory counts), only in one sex (females),
only on postnatal day 21 (not in measurements taken at three other time
periods), and the differences did not reach statistical significance.
iii. The sole brain morphometric change (increased mean vertical
thickness of the cortex ) was determined to occur in isolation, only in
female pups on day 21, and was not considered biologically significant
because when the values of individual treated animals were compared
with individual control animals, the incidence and magnitude of the
change suggested a low concern.No statistically or biologically
significant changes were seen in any other brain areas in male or
female pups at any time period.
Based on these factors, the limited susceptibility seen in the DNT
was determined to be of low concern, and there are no residual
uncertainties for pre- and/or postnatal neurotoxicity.
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 cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin is
complete.
ii. There is no evidence that cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin
results in increased qualitative or quantitative susceptibility in in
utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal developmental studies or in young
rats in the 2-generation reproduction study.
iii. Although there is limited evidence of increased susceptibility
of the offspring in the DNT study, the degree
[[Page 1523]]
of concern for pre- and/or postnatal toxicity is low and the Agency did
not identify any residual uncertainties after establishing toxicity
endpoints and traditional UFs to be used in the risk assessment.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The acute dietary food exposure assessment utilizes
tolerance level residues and 100 PCT. The chronic dietary food exposure
assessment utilizes anticipated residues that are based on reliable
field trial or PDP monitoring data. The chronic assessment also
utilizes PCT data for many registered commodities that have been
verified by the Agency, as well as high-end PPCT estimates for animal
feed items that are unlikely to be exceeded during the next 5 years.
Conservative ground and surface water modeling estimates were used.
Similarly, conservative residential SOPs were used to assess post-
application exposure of children as well as incidental oral exposure of
toddlers. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin.
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 UFs. For
linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the probability of additional
cancer cases given aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, 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 UFs 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 cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin will occupy 53% of the aPAD for
children, 1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin from food and water will utilize 3.0% of
the cPAD for children, 1 to 2 years old, the population group with the
greatest estimated exposure. Based on the use pattern, chronic
residential exposure to residues of cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin is
not expected.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. Short-term and intermediate-
term aggregate exposure take into account residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background
exposure level). Cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin is currently registered
for uses that could result in short- and intermediate-term residential
exposures and the Agency has determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic food and water and short- or intermediate-term
exposures for cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin. Since the cypermethrin/
zeta-cypermethrin endpoints and points of departure (NOAELs) are
identical for short- and intermediate-term exposures, in this case the
aggregate MOEs for short- and intermediate-term exposure are the same.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term and intermediate-term exposures, EPA has concluded that food,
water, and residential exposures aggregated result in aggregate MOEs of
7,500 for the overall U.S. population and 8,600 for females 13 to 49
years old, using handler exposure estimates based on indoor surface
uses of cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin. Aggregate MOEs for infants and
children are estimated to be 220 and 160, respectively, based on post-
application exposures following indoor surface treatments with
cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin. The indoor surface treatment scenario
was used in the aggregate assessment, since this scenario resulted in
the highest estimated exposures and is, therefore, protective of all
post-application exposures. These aggregate MOEs do not exceed the
Agency's level of concern for aggregate exposure to food, water and
residential uses.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Cypermethrin/zeta-
cypermethrin has been classified as a ``Group C'' (possible human)
carcinogen, based on an increased incidence of lung adenomas and
combined adenomas plus carcinomas in female mice. As explained above,
risk assessments based on the endpoint selected for the chronic
population adjusted dose (cPAD) are considered to be protective of any
potential carcinogenic risk from exposure to cypermethrin/zeta-
cypermethrin. Based on the results of the chronic risk assessment
discussed above in Unit III.E.2., EPA concludes that cypermethrin/zeta-
cypermethrin 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 cypermethrin/zeta-cypermethrin residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement analytical methodology for cypermethrin and
zeta-cypermethrin residues is available in PAM Volume II. PAM Volume II
lists Methods I and II for the determination of residues of
cypermethrin per se in or on plant and livestock commodities,
respectively. Both are gas chromatography (GC) methods with electron
capture detection and have undergone successful Agency method tryout.
Method I has a detection limit of 0.01 ppm and Method II has detection
limits of 0.005 ppm for milk and 0.01 ppm for livestock tissues. These
methods are not stereo-specific; thus, no distinction is made between
residues of cypermethrin (all eight stereoisomers) and zeta-
cypermethrin (an enriched isomer form of cypermethrin).
B. International Residue Limits
There are no specific Codex maximum residue limits (MRLs) for zeta-
cypermethrin, but there are Codex MRLs for cypermethrin. Codex has an
MRL of 2.0 ppm for cypermethrin on citrus, an MRL of 0.2 ppm on
oilseeds and an MRL of 0.5 ppm on edible vegetable oils. The 0.2 ppm
U.S. tolerances on safflower and other oilseeds are harmonized
numerically with the current Codex MRL of 0.2 mg/kg on oilseeds,
although the latter is based on cypermethrin instead of zeta-
cypermethrin. EPA is not recommending an increase in the U.S. citrus
tolerance of 0.35 ppm or the tolerance on refined oils of 0.4 ppm to
harmonize numerically with the Codex MRLs on citrus and edible
vegetable oils, because the latter are expressed in terms of
cypermethrin, which requires higher application rates and residues than
zeta-cypermethrin to be efficacious.
C. Response to Comments
Comments were received from a private citizen objecting to the sale
of zeta-cypermethrin anywhere in this country on the basis that it is a
``possible human carcinogen''. EPA considered the carcinogenic
potential of zeta-cypermethrin in its risk assessment and determined
that it did not pose a cancer risk. Comments received contained no
scientific data or other substantive evidence to rebut this conclusion
or the Agency's finding that there is a reasonable certainty that no
[[Page 1524]]
harm will result from aggregate exposure to cypermethrin/zeta-
cypermethrin from the establishment of these tolerances. The Agency has
received these same or similar comments from this commenter on numerous
previous occasions. Refer to 70 FR 37686 (June 30, 2005), 70 FR 1354
(January 7, 2005), and 69 FR 63096-63098 (October 29, 2004) for the
Agency's previous responses to these objections.
V. Conclusion
Based upon review of the data supporting the petitions, EPA has
modified the proposed tolerances as follows: (1) Increased the
tolerance level for Fruit, citrus, group 10 from 0.25 ppm to 0.35 ppm;
for Citrus, dried pulp from 0.5 ppm to 1.8 ppm; and for Citrus, oil
from 0.9 ppm to 4.0 ppm; and (2) Determined that a separate, higher
tolerance of 0.4 ppm should be established for specific refined oils.
EPA revised these tolerance levels 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 and the results of citrus and oilseed processing
studies. EPA also revised the commodity term for Safflower to read
``Safflower, seed'' to agree with the recommended commodity term in the
Office of Pesticide Program's Food and Feed Commodity Vocabulary.
Therefore, tolerances are established for combined residues of
zeta-cypermethrin, S-cyano(3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl()(cis-
trans 3-(2,2-dichloroethenyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and
its inactive R-isomers, in or on Borage, seed at 0.2 ppm; Castor oil
plant, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Castor oil plant, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Chinese tallowtree, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Chinese tallowtree, seed at
0.2 ppm; Citrus, dried pulp at 1.8 ppm; Citrus, oil at 4.0 ppm; Crambe,
seed at 0.2 ppm; Cuphea, seed at 0.2 ppm; Echium, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Euphorbia, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Euphorbia, seed at 0.2 ppm; Evening
primrose, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Evening primrose, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Flax, seed at 0.2 ppm; Fruit, citrus, group 10 at 0.35 ppm; Gold of
pleasure, seed at 0.2 ppm; Hare's-ear mustard, seed at 0.2 ppm; Jojoba,
refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Jojoba, seed at 0.2 ppm; Lesquerella, seed at
0.2 ppm; Lunaria, seed at 0.2 pm; Meadowfoam, seed at 0.2 ppm;
Milkweed, seed at 0.2 ppm; Mustard, seed at 0.2 ppm; Niger seed,
refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Niger seed, seed at 0.2 ppm; Oil radish, seed
at 0.2 ppm; Okra at 0.2 ppm; Poppy, seed at 0.2 ppm; Rice, wild, grain
at 1.5 ppm; Rose hip, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Rose hip, seed at 0.2
ppm; Safflower, seed at 0.2 ppm; Sesame, seed at 0.2 ppm; Stokes aster,
refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Stokes aster, seed at 0.2 ppm; Sweet rocket,
seed at 0.2 ppm; Tallowwood, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Tallowwood, seed
at 0.2 ppm; Tea oil plant, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; Tea oil plant, seed
at 0.2 ppm; Vernonia, refined oil at 0.4 ppm; and Vernonia, seed at 0.2
ppm.
Time-limited tolerances were established at 40 CFR 180.418(b) for
residues of zeta-cypermethrin in or on flax, meal and seed in
connection with FIFRA section 18 emergency exemptions granted by EPA.
These time-limited tolerances are no longer necessary, because a
permanent tolerance is being established for flax at the same level.
Therefore, these time-limited tolerances for residues of zeta-
cypermethrin are revoked.
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: December 20, 2007.
Lois Rossi
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
[[Page 1525]]
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 180.418 is amended by alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table in paragraph (a)(2) and removing the text from
paragraph (b) and reserving the paragraph designation and heading to
read as follows:
Sec. 180.418 Cypermethrin and an isomer zeta-cypermethrin; tolerances
for residues.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Borage, seed............................................ 0.2
* * * * *
Castor oil plant, refined oil........................... 0.4
Castor oil plant, seed.................................. 0.2
* * * * *
Chinese tallowtree, refined oil......................... 0.4
Chinese tallowtree, seed................................ 0.2
* * * * *
Citrus, dried pulp...................................... 1.8
Citrus, oil............................................. 4.0
* * * * *
Crambe, seed............................................ 0.2
Cuphea, seed............................................ 0.2
Echium, seed............................................ 0.2
* * * * *
Euphorbia, refined oil.................................. 0.4
Euphorbia, seed......................................... 0.2
Evening primrose, refined oil........................... 0.4
Evening primrose, seed.................................. 0.2
Flax, seed.............................................. 0.2
* * * * *
Fruit, citrus, group 10................................. 0.35
* * * * *
Gold of pleasure, seed.................................. 0.2
* * * * *
Hare's-ear mustard, seed................................ 0.2
* * * * *
Jojoba, refined oil..................................... 0.4
Jojoba, seed............................................ 0.2
Lesquerella, seed....................................... 0.2
Lunaria, seed........................................... 0.2
Meadowfoam, seed........................................ 0.2
* * * * *
Milkweed, seed.......................................... 0.2
Mustard, seed........................................... 0.2
Niger seed, refined oil................................. 0.4
Niger seed, seed........................................ 0.2
* * * * *
Oil radish, seed........................................ 0.2
Okra.................................................... 0.2
* * * * *
Poppy, seed............................................. 0.2
* * * * *
Rice, wild, grain....................................... 1.5
Rose hip, refined oil................................... 0.4
Rose hip, seed.......................................... 0.2
Safflower, seed......................................... 0.2
Sesame, seed............................................ 0.2
* * * * *
Stokes aster, refined oil............................... 0.4
Stokes aster, seed...................................... 0.2
* * * * *
Sweet rocket, seed...................................... 0.2
Tallowwood, refined oil................................. 0.4
Tallowwood, seed........................................ 0.2
Tea oil plant, refined oil.............................. 0.4
Tea oil plant, seed..................................... 0.2
* * * * *
Vernonia, refined oil................................... 0.4
Vernonia, seed.......................................... 0.2
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-25392 Filed 1-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S