Pyridalyl; Pesticide Tolerances, 25528-25533 [E8-9823Filed]
Download as PDF
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
25528
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 7, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
IX. 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 final 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 9, 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:44 May 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
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).
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
X. Congressional Review Act
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of pyridalyl in or
on vegetables, leafy, except Brassica,
group 4; Brassica, head and stem,
subgroup 5A; vegetables, fruiting, group
8; mustard greens; and turnip greens.
Valent U.S.A. Corporation and the
International Research Project Number 4
(IR-4) requested these tolerances under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective May
7, 2008. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
July 7, 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.
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: April 23, 2008.
Debra Edwards,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.1282 is added to read
as follows:
I
§ 180.1282 Bacillus firmus I-1582;
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance.
An exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance is established in/on all
food/feed commodities, for residues of
Bacillus firmus I-1582 when used as a
soil application or seed treatment.
[FR Doc. E8–10121 Filed 5–6–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2004–0306; FRL–8361–4]
Pyridalyl; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2004–0306. 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: Olga
Odiott, Registration Division (7505P),
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 7, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 308–9369; e-mail address:
odiott.olga@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).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather 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.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:44 May 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2004–0306 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 July 7, 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–2004–0306, 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 December 5,
2003 (68 FR 68044) (FRL–7344–6), 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 2F6459 and
3E6592) (petition 3E6592 was
inadvertently referred to as 2E6592 in
the December, 2003 FR notice) by
Valent U.S.A. Corporation, 1600 Riviera
Ave., Suite 200, Walnut Creek,
California 94596–8025 and the
International Research Project Number 4
(IR-4), 681 U.S Highway #1 South,
North Brunswick, NJ, 08902–3390.
Petition 2F6459 requested that 40 CFR
180 be amended by establishing
tolerances for residues of the insecticide
pyridalyl, (pyridine, 2-[3-[2,6-dichloro4-[(3,3-dichloro-2propenyl)oxy]phenoxy]propoxy]-5(trifluoromethyl), in or on vegetables,
leafy, except Brassica, group 4, at 20.0
parts per million (ppm); vegetables,
fruiting, group 8, at 1.1 ppm; Brassica,
head and stem, subgroup 5A, at 5.0
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
25529
ppm; cotton seed at 0.4 ppm; meat at
0.04 ppm; meat by-products at 0.05
ppm; animal fat at 1.0 ppm; and whole
milk at 0.1 ppm; and to establish
tolerances for residues of pyridalyl plus
the metabolite 3,5-dichloro-4-[3-(5trifluoromethyl-2-pyridyloxy)]propoxy
phenol (S-1812-DP) in or on the raw
agricultural commodity cotton, gin
byproducts at 23.0 ppm. Petition
3E6592 requested that 40 CFR 180 Part
be amended by establishing tolerances
for residues of pyridalyl in or on the raw
agricultural commodities: Brassica,
leafy greens, subgroup 5B, at 30 ppm;
and turnip greens at 30 ppm. That
notice referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Valent U.S.A.
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.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petitions, EPA has
determined that the proposed tolerances
for Brassica, head and stem, subgroup
5A, and vegetables, fruiting, group 8,
should be reduced to 3.5 ppm; and 1.0
ppm respectively; that a tolerance for
mustard greens at 30 ppm; should be
proposed; and that the proposed
tolerance for Brassica, leafy greens,
subgroup 5B should be deleted. The
reasons for these changes are explained
in Unit IV.C. The Agency is evaluating
additional environmental fate data and
has not yet made a decision to register
the outdoor uses associated with the
proposed tolerances for cotton and
related commodities. A decision to
establish these tolerances will be made
at such time when the Agency makes
the determination to register these
outdoor uses.
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
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
25530
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 7, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue....’’
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, and the factors specified in
section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for the following
petitioned-for tolerances for residues of
pyridalyl per se in or on vegetables,
leafy, except Brassica, group 4, at 20
ppm; Brassica, head and stem, subgroup
5A at 3.5 ppm; vegetables, fruiting,
group 8, at 1.0 ppm; mustard greens at
30 ppm; and turnip greens at 30 ppm.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with establishing tolerances
follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
Pyridalyl has low acute toxicity via
the oral, dermal and inhalation routes of
exposure but is a dermal sensitizer.
There was no evidence of neurotoxicity
seen in either the sub-chronic and
chronic toxicity studies or the
developmental and reproductive
studies. There is low concern for
prenatal and/or postnatal toxicity
resulting from exposure to pyridalyl.
Pyridalyl is classified as ‘‘Not Likely to
be Carcinogenic to Humans’’ based on
lack of carcinogenicity in mice and rats
and overall negative findings in various
mutagenicity studies.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by pyridalyl as well as
the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document
pyridalyl in/on cotton, fruiting
vegetables, leafy vegetables, head and
stem Brassica vegetables, Brassica leafy
greens, and turnip greens, shrubs,
ornamentals and non-bearing trees. HED
Risk Assessment on page number 26 in
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2004–
0306.
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold
below which there is no appreciable
risk, a toxicological point of departure
(POD) is identified as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk
assessment. The POD may be defined as
the highest dose at which no adverse
effects are observed 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 or a Benchmark
Dose (BMD) approach is sometimes
used for risk assessment. Uncertainty/
safety factors (UFs) are used in
conjunction with the POD 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 dietary risks by comparing
aggregate food and water 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 POD by all applicable UFs.
Aggregate short-term, intermediate-term,
and chronic-term risks are evaluated by
comparing food, water, and residential
exposure to the POD to ensure that the
margin of exposure (MOE) called for by
the product of all applicable UFs is not
exceeded. This latter value is referred to
as the Level of Concern (LOC).
For non-threshold risks, the Agency
assumes that any amount of exposure
will lead to some degree of risk. Thus,
the Agency estimates risk in terms of the
probability of an occurrence of the
adverse effect greater than that expected
in a lifetime. 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 pyridalyl used for human
risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of
this unit.
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR PYRIDALYL FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK ASSESSMENT
Point of Departure and Uncertainty/Safety Factors
Exposure/Scenario
RfD, PAD, LOC for Risk Assessment
Study and Toxicological
Effects
Acute dietary (females 13–50 years of
age)
Acute dietary (general population including
infants and children)
An effect of concern attributable to a single exposure (dose) was not identified from the oral toxicity studies, including the developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits.
Chronic dietary (All populations)
NOAEL= 3.4 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation)
cPAD = 0.034 mg/kg/day
Combined chronic
toxicity/carcinogenicity
study-rats
LOAEL = 17.1
miligrams/kilogram/day
(mg/kg/day) on males
and 21.1 mg/kg/day on
females based on
decreased body weights,
weight gain, and food
efficiency.
Classified as ‘‘Not likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population
(intraspecies). FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. LOC = level of
concern.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:44 May 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 7, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
Pyridalyl residues of concern for
tolerance expression and risk
assessment were determined to be: 3,5dichloro-4-[3-(5-trifluoromethyl-2pyridyloxy)]propoxy phenol (S-1812DP), 2-hydroxy-5trifluoromethylpyridine (HTFP), and 3hydroxy-5-trifluoromethylpyridone
(HPDO).
Pyridalyl is the predominant residue
in crops and livestock. S-1812-DP is the
only major metabolite observed in any
of the metabolism studies and is found
at significant levels in the cotton gin
byproduct field trials. The toxicity of S1812-DP is assumed to be comparable to
the parent compound.
Rotational crops did not take up
parent pyridalyl or its metabolite S1812-DP from the soil, but did take up
metabolite HTFP. HTFP was then
metabolized in rotational crops via
oxidation to HPDO. Metabolites HTFP
and HPDO are assumed to be of
equivalent toxicity to the parent
compound and are included as residues
of concern.
Pyridalyl is expected to be persistent
in both soil and aquatic environments.
However, S-1812-DP and HTFP, the
major metabolites in the terrestrial fielddissipation studies, are expected to be
more soluble and mobile than the parent
compound, and therefore are included
in the drinking water assessment.
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to pyridalyl, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances for pyridalyl. EPA assessed
dietary exposures from pyridalyl in food
as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide,
if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1–day or single
exposure.
No such effects were identified in the
toxicological studies for pyridalyl;
therefore, a quantitative acute dietary
exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the United States Department of
Agricuulture (USDA) 1994–1996 and
1998 Continuing Surveys of Food Intake
by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue
levels in food, EPA used tolerance level
residues and 100 percent crop treated
(PCT) information for all commodities.
In addition, Dietary Exposure
Evaluation (DEEM/TM) (version 7.76)
default processing factors were used for
all processed commodities.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:44 May 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
iii. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for pyridalyl.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for pyridalyl in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of pyridalyl.
Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at
https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/
water/index.htm.
The Agency used estimated
environmental concentrations (EECs),
which are the model estimates of a
pesticide’s concentration in water, to
quantify pyridalyl drinking water
exposure and risk as a Percent Reference
Dose (%RfD) or %PAD. Drinking water
levels of comparison (DWLOCs) were
calculated and used as a point of
comparison against the model estimates
of the pesticide’s concentration in
water. DWLOCs are theoretical upper
limits on a pesticide’s concentration in
drinking water in light of total aggregate
exposure to a pesticide in food, and
from residential uses. Since DWLOCs
address total aggregate exposure to
pyridalyl they are further discussed in
the aggregate risk sections in Unit E.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCIGROW) models the EECs of pyridalyl for
chronic exposures are estimated to be
1.64 parts per billion (ppb) for surface
water and 3.4 ppb for ground 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).
Pyridalyl is not registered for any
specific use patterns that would result
in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found pyridalyl to share
a common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and pyridalyl
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
25531
does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that pyridalyl does not have a
common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(c) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) 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 (SF). In applying this
provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There was low concern for the
quantitative susceptibility in the 2generation reproduction study, since
there was clear NOAEL for the offspring
toxicity, the effects of concern were well
defined and used for risk assessment.
Therefore, there are no concerns and no
residual uncertainties with regard to
prenatal and/or postnatal toxicity.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for pyridalyl
is complete.
ii. There is no indication that
pyridalyl is a neurotoxic chemical and
there is no need for a developmental
neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to
account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There are no concerns and no
residual uncertainties with regard to
prenatal and/or postnatal toxicity.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100% CT and
tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground water and surface water
modeling used to assess exposure to
pyridalyl in drinking water. These
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
25532
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 7, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by pyridalyl.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
To estimate total aggregate exposure
to pyridalyl from food, drinking water,
and residential uses, the Agency
calculated DWLOCs which are used as
a point of comparison against EECs.
DWLOC values are not regulatory
standards for drinking water. DWLOCs
are theoretical upper limits on a
pesticide’s concentration in drinking
water in light of total aggregate exposure
to a pesticide in food and residential
uses. In calculating a DWLOC, the
Agency determines how much of the
acceptable exposure (i.e., the PAD) is
available for exposure through drinking
water [e.g., allowable chronic water
exposure (mg/kg/day) = cPAD - (average
food + residential exposure)]. This
allowable exposure through drinking
water is used to calculate a DWLOC.
A DWLOC will vary depending on the
toxic endpoint, drinking water
consumption, and body weights. Default
body weights and consumption values
as used by the EPA’s Office of Water are
used to calculate DWLOCs: 2 liter (L)/
drinking water as a part of the aggregate
risk assessment process.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account exposure
estimates from acute dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single-oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, pyridalyl is not
expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that exposure to pyridalyl from food
will utilize 35% of the cPAD for the
U.S. population, 20% of the cPAD for
all infants, and 59% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the children
subpopulation at greatest exposure.
There are no residential uses for
pyridalyl. There is potential for chronic
dietary exposure to pyridalyl and its
metabolites in drinking water. After
calculating DWLOCs and comparing
them to the EECs for surface water and
ground water, EPA does not expect the
aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of
the cPAD, as shown in the following
Table:
70 kg (adult male), 2L/60 kg (adult
female), and 1L/10 kg (child). Default
body weights and drinking water
consumption values vary on an
individual basis. This variation will be
taken into account in more refined
screening-level and quantitative
drinking water exposure assessments.
Different populations will have different
DWLOCs. Generally, a DWLOC is
calculated for each type of risk
assessment used: Acute, short-term,
intermediate-term, chronic term, and
cancer.
When EECs for surface water and
ground water are less than the
calculated DWLOCs, EPA concludes
with reasonable certainty that exposures
to the pesticide in drinking water (when
considered along with other sources of
exposure for which EPA has reliable
data) would not result in unacceptable
levels of aggregate human health risk at
this time. Because EPA considers the
aggregate risk resulting from multiple
exposure pathways associated with a
pesticide’s uses, levels of comparison in
drinking water may vary as those uses
change. If new uses are added in the
future, EPA will reassess the potential
impacts of residues of the pesticide in
TABLE 2.—AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CHRONIC (NON-CANCER) EXPOSURE TO PYRIDALYL
Population Subgroup
Surface
Water
EECa(ppb)
%cPAD
(Food)
cPAD mg/kg/day
Ground
Water
EECb(ppb)
Chronic
DWLOC
(ppb)
U.S. population
0.034
35
1.64
3.4
780
All infants (< 1 yr)
0.034
20
1.64
3.4
270
Children 1-2 yrs.
0.034
59
1.64
3.4
140
Tier II PRZM-EXAMS - Index reservoir model, pyridalyl plus HTFP and S-1812-DP.
b Tier 1 SCI-GROW model, HTFP (highest value).
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
a
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
Pyridalyl is not registered for any use
patterns that would result in residential
exposure. Therefore, the short-term
aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from
exposure to pyridalyl through food and
water and will not be greater than the
chronic aggregate risk.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Pyridalyl is not registered for any use
patterns that would result in
intermediate-term residential exposure.
Therefore, the intermediate-term
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:44 May 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from
exposure to pyridalyl through food and
water, which has already been
addressed, and will not be greater than
the chronic aggregate risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Pyridalyl is classified as
‘‘not likely to be carcinogenic to
humans’’ by all relevant routes of
exposure based on adequate studies in
mice and rats and overall negative
findings in various mutagenicity assays.
Therefore, pyridalyl 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 pyridalyl
residues.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(gas chromatography/nitrogenphosphorus detector (GC/NPD) methods
RM-38P-1-1, RM-38M-1, and RM-38M-11 for plant commodities; and RM-38P-2
and RM-38P-3-1 for livestock
commodities) is available to enforce the
tolerance expression. The methods may
be requested from: Chief, Analytical
Chemistry Branch, Environmental
Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft.
Meade, MD 20755–5350; telephone
number: (410) 305–2905; e-mail address:
residuemethods@epa.gov. FDA
multiresidue methods (protocols B, D, E,
and F) are also available for enforcement
of the tolerances (PAM Vol.I, Appendix
II, 1/94).
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
25533
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 7, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
B. International Residue Limits
There are currently no U.S. or
international Codex tolerances
established for pyridalyl.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
Based on its review of submitted crop
field trial data, EPA determined that the
proposed tolerances for Brassica head
and stem, subgroup 5A; and for fruiting
vegetables, group 8 should be reduced
to 3.5 and 1.0 ppm, respectively. The
Agency determined also that the data
were not sufficient to support the
proposed tolerance for Brassica leafy
greens, subgroup 5B; although a
mustard green tolerance at 30 ppm was
supported by the data.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of pyridalyl per se, in or on
vegetables, leafy, except Brassica, group
4 at 20 ppm; Brassica, head and stem,
subgroup 5A at 3.5 ppm; vegetables,
fruiting, group 8 at 1.0 ppm; mustard
greens at 30 ppm; and turnip greens at
30 ppm.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances
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 final 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:44 May 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
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 9, 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).
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Dated: April 23, 2008.
Debra Edwards,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.640 is added to read as
follows:
I
180.640
Pyridalyl; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of pyridalyl,
pyridine,2-[3-[2,6-dichloro-4-[(3,3dichloro-2propenyl)oxy]phenoxy]propoxy]-5(trifluoromethyl, in or on the following
raw agricultural commodities:)
Commodity
Parts per million
Brassica, head and stem,
subgroup 5A ................
Mustard greens ...............
Turnip greens .................
Vegetable, fruiting, group
8 ..................................
Vegetables, leafy, except
Brassica, group 4
3.5
30
30
1.0
20
(b) Section 18 emergency exemption.
[Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional
registration. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues.
[Reserved]
[FR Doc. E8–9823Filed 5–6–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0398; FRL–8362–2]
Spirodiclofen; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a
tolerance for residues of spirodiclofen in
or on hop, dried cones. Interregional
Research Project Number 4 (IR–4)
requested this tolerance under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
This regulation is effective May
7, 2008. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
July 7, 2008, and must be filed in
accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 7, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25528-25533]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-9823Filed]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0306; FRL-8361-4]
Pyridalyl; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
pyridalyl in or on vegetables, leafy, except Brassica, group 4;
Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A; vegetables, fruiting, group 8;
mustard greens; and turnip greens. Valent U.S.A. Corporation and the
International Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective May 7, 2008. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before July 7, 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-2004-0306. 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: Olga Odiott, Registration Division
(7505P),
[[Page 25529]]
Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 308-9369; e-mail address: odiott.olga@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).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 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-2004-0306 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 July 7, 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-2004-0306, 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 December 5, 2003 (68 FR 68044) (FRL-
7344-6), 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
2F6459 and 3E6592) (petition 3E6592 was inadvertently referred to as
2E6592 in the December, 2003 FR notice) by Valent U.S.A. Corporation,
1600 Riviera Ave., Suite 200, Walnut Creek, California 94596-8025 and
the International Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 681 U.S Highway
1 South, North Brunswick, NJ, 08902-3390. Petition 2F6459
requested that 40 CFR 180 be amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the insecticide pyridalyl, (pyridine, 2-[3-[2,6-dichloro-4-
[(3,3-dichloro-2-propenyl)oxy]phenoxy]propoxy]-5-(trifluoromethyl), in
or on vegetables, leafy, except Brassica, group 4, at 20.0 parts per
million (ppm); vegetables, fruiting, group 8, at 1.1 ppm; Brassica,
head and stem, subgroup 5A, at 5.0 ppm; cotton seed at 0.4 ppm; meat at
0.04 ppm; meat by-products at 0.05 ppm; animal fat at 1.0 ppm; and
whole milk at 0.1 ppm; and to establish tolerances for residues of
pyridalyl plus the metabolite 3,5-dichloro-4-[3-(5-trifluoromethyl-2-
pyridyloxy)]propoxy phenol (S-1812-DP) in or on the raw agricultural
commodity cotton, gin byproducts at 23.0 ppm. Petition 3E6592 requested
that 40 CFR 180 Part be amended by establishing tolerances for residues
of pyridalyl in or on the raw agricultural commodities: Brassica, leafy
greens, subgroup 5B, at 30 ppm; and turnip greens at 30 ppm. That
notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Valent U.S.A.
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.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petitions, EPA has
determined that the proposed tolerances for Brassica, head and stem,
subgroup 5A, and vegetables, fruiting, group 8, should be reduced to
3.5 ppm; and 1.0 ppm respectively; that a tolerance for mustard greens
at 30 ppm; should be proposed; and that the proposed tolerance for
Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B should be deleted. The reasons for
these changes are explained in Unit IV.C. The Agency is evaluating
additional environmental fate data and has not yet made a decision to
register the outdoor uses associated with the proposed tolerances for
cotton and related commodities. A decision to establish these
tolerances will be made at such time when the Agency makes the
determination to register these outdoor uses.
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
[[Page 25530]]
reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue....''
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure for the following
petitioned-for tolerances for residues of pyridalyl per se in or on
vegetables, leafy, except Brassica, group 4, at 20 ppm; Brassica, head
and stem, subgroup 5A at 3.5 ppm; vegetables, fruiting, group 8, at 1.0
ppm; mustard greens at 30 ppm; and turnip greens at 30 ppm. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with establishing
tolerances follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
Pyridalyl has low acute toxicity via the oral, dermal and
inhalation routes of exposure but is a dermal sensitizer. There was no
evidence of neurotoxicity seen in either the sub-chronic and chronic
toxicity studies or the developmental and reproductive studies. There
is low concern for prenatal and/or postnatal toxicity resulting from
exposure to pyridalyl. Pyridalyl is classified as ``Not Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans'' based on lack of carcinogenicity in mice and
rats and overall negative findings in various mutagenicity studies.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by pyridalyl 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 document pyridalyl in/on cotton, fruiting
vegetables, leafy vegetables, head and stem Brassica vegetables,
Brassica leafy greens, and turnip greens, shrubs, ornamentals and non-
bearing trees. HED Risk Assessment on page number 26 in docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0306.
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, a toxicological point of departure (POD) is
identified as the basis for derivation of reference values for risk
assessment. The POD may be defined as the highest dose at which no
adverse effects are observed 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 or a Benchmark Dose (BMD) approach is sometimes used for
risk assessment. Uncertainty/safety factors (UFs) are used in
conjunction with the POD 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 dietary
risks by comparing aggregate food and water 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
POD by all applicable UFs. Aggregate short-term, intermediate-term, and
chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing food, water, and
residential exposure to the POD to ensure that the margin of exposure
(MOE) called for by the product of all applicable UFs is not exceeded.
This latter value is referred to as the Level of Concern (LOC).
For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of
exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency estimates
risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the adverse effect
greater than that expected in a lifetime. 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 pyridalyl used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1.--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Pyridalyl for Use in Human Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of Departure and
Exposure/Scenario Uncertainty/Safety RfD, PAD, LOC for Risk Study and Toxicological
Factors Assessment Effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (females 13-50 years of An effect of concern attributable to a single exposure (dose) was not
age) identified from the oral toxicity studies, including the developmental
Acute dietary (general population toxicity studies in rats and rabbits.
including infants and children).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations) NOAEL= 3.4 mg/kg/day cPAD = 0.034 mg/kg/day Combined chronic
UFA = 10x.............. toxicity/
UFH = 10x.............. carcinogenicity study-
FQPA SF = 1x........... rats
LOAEL = 17.1 miligrams/
kilogram/day (mg/kg/
day) on males and 21.1
mg/kg/day on females
based on decreased body
weights, weight gain,
and food efficiency.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation) Classified as ``Not likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans''
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members
of the human population (intraspecies). FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a =
acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. LOC = level of concern.
[[Page 25531]]
C. Exposure Assessment
Pyridalyl residues of concern for tolerance expression and risk
assessment were determined to be: 3,5-dichloro-4-[3-(5-trifluoromethyl-
2-pyridyloxy)]propoxy phenol (S-1812-DP), 2-hydroxy-5-
trifluoromethylpyridine (HTFP), and 3-hydroxy-5-trifluoromethylpyridone
(HPDO).
Pyridalyl is the predominant residue in crops and livestock. S-
1812-DP is the only major metabolite observed in any of the metabolism
studies and is found at significant levels in the cotton gin byproduct
field trials. The toxicity of S-1812-DP is assumed to be comparable to
the parent compound.
Rotational crops did not take up parent pyridalyl or its metabolite
S-1812-DP from the soil, but did take up metabolite HTFP. HTFP was then
metabolized in rotational crops via oxidation to HPDO. Metabolites HTFP
and HPDO are assumed to be of equivalent toxicity to the parent
compound and are included as residues of concern.
Pyridalyl is expected to be persistent in both soil and aquatic
environments. However, S-1812-DP and HTFP, the major metabolites in the
terrestrial field-dissipation studies, are expected to be more soluble
and mobile than the parent compound, and therefore are included in the
drinking water assessment.
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to pyridalyl, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances for pyridalyl. EPA assessed dietary exposures from pyridalyl
in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for
pyridalyl; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment
is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the United States
Department of Agricuulture (USDA) 1994-1996 and 1998 Continuing Surveys
of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food,
EPA used tolerance level residues and 100 percent crop treated (PCT)
information for all commodities. In addition, Dietary Exposure
Evaluation (DEEM/TM) (version 7.76) default processing
factors were used for all processed commodities.
iii. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the dietary assessment
for pyridalyl.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for pyridalyl in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of pyridalyl. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
The Agency used estimated environmental concentrations (EECs),
which are the model estimates of a pesticide's concentration in water,
to quantify pyridalyl drinking water exposure and risk as a Percent
Reference Dose (%RfD) or %PAD. Drinking water levels of comparison
(DWLOCs) were calculated and used as a point of comparison against the
model estimates of the pesticide's concentration in water. DWLOCs are
theoretical upper limits on a pesticide's concentration in drinking
water in light of total aggregate exposure to a pesticide in food, and
from residential uses. Since DWLOCs address total aggregate exposure to
pyridalyl they are further discussed in the aggregate risk sections in
Unit E.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models the EECs of pyridalyl for chronic exposures are estimated
to be 1.64 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 3.4 ppb for
ground 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).
Pyridalyl is not registered for any specific use patterns that
would result in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found pyridalyl to share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and pyridalyl does not appear to produce a
toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that pyridalyl does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of
such chemicals, see EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(c) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) 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 (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There was low concern for
the quantitative susceptibility in the 2-generation reproduction study,
since there was clear NOAEL for the offspring toxicity, the effects of
concern were well defined and used for risk assessment. Therefore,
there are no concerns and no residual uncertainties with regard to
prenatal and/or postnatal toxicity.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for pyridalyl is complete.
ii. There is no indication that pyridalyl is a neurotoxic chemical
and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There are no concerns and no residual uncertainties with
regard to prenatal and/or postnatal toxicity.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100% CT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground water and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to pyridalyl in drinking water. These
[[Page 25532]]
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
pyridalyl.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
To estimate total aggregate exposure to pyridalyl from food,
drinking water, and residential uses, the Agency calculated DWLOCs
which are used as a point of comparison against EECs. DWLOC values are
not regulatory standards for drinking water. DWLOCs are theoretical
upper limits on a pesticide's concentration in drinking water in light
of total aggregate exposure to a pesticide in food and residential
uses. In calculating a DWLOC, the Agency determines how much of the
acceptable exposure (i.e., the PAD) is available for exposure through
drinking water [e.g., allowable chronic water exposure (mg/kg/day) =
cPAD - (average food + residential exposure)]. This allowable exposure
through drinking water is used to calculate a DWLOC.
A DWLOC will vary depending on the toxic endpoint, drinking water
consumption, and body weights. Default body weights and consumption
values as used by the EPA's Office of Water are used to calculate
DWLOCs: 2 liter (L)/70 kg (adult male), 2L/60 kg (adult female), and
1L/10 kg (child). Default body weights and drinking water consumption
values vary on an individual basis. This variation will be taken into
account in more refined screening-level and quantitative drinking water
exposure assessments. Different populations will have different DWLOCs.
Generally, a DWLOC is calculated for each type of risk assessment used:
Acute, short-term, intermediate-term, chronic term, and cancer.
When EECs for surface water and ground water are less than the
calculated DWLOCs, EPA concludes with reasonable certainty that
exposures to the pesticide in drinking water (when considered along
with other sources of exposure for which EPA has reliable data) would
not result in unacceptable levels of aggregate human health risk at
this time. Because EPA considers the aggregate risk resulting from
multiple exposure pathways associated with a pesticide's uses, levels
of comparison in drinking water may vary as those uses change. If new
uses are added in the future, EPA will reassess the potential impacts
of residues of the pesticide in drinking water as a part of the
aggregate risk assessment process.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account exposure estimates from acute dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single-oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
pyridalyl is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to pyridalyl
from food will utilize 35% of the cPAD for the U.S. population, 20% of
the cPAD for all infants, and 59% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years
old, the children subpopulation at greatest exposure. There are no
residential uses for pyridalyl. There is potential for chronic dietary
exposure to pyridalyl and its metabolites in drinking water. After
calculating DWLOCs and comparing them to the EECs for surface water and
ground water, EPA does not expect the aggregate exposure to exceed 100%
of the cPAD, as shown in the following Table:
Table 2.--Aggregate Risk Assessment for Chronic (Non-Cancer) Exposure to Pyridalyl
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface Ground
Population Subgroup cPAD mg/kg/day %cPAD Water Water Chronic
(Food) EECa(ppb) EECb(ppb) DWLOC (ppb)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. population 0.034 35 1.64 3.4 780
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All infants (< 1 yr) 0.034 20 1.64 3.4 270
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Children 1-2 yrs. 0.034 59 1.64 3.4 140
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Tier II PRZM-EXAMS - Index reservoir model, pyridalyl plus HTFP and S-1812-DP.
b Tier 1 SCI-GROW model, HTFP (highest value).
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
Pyridalyl is not registered for any use patterns that would result
in residential exposure. Therefore, the short-term aggregate risk is
the sum of the risk from exposure to pyridalyl through food and water
and will not be greater than the chronic aggregate risk.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
Pyridalyl is not registered for any use patterns that would result
in intermediate-term residential exposure. Therefore, the intermediate-
term aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from exposure to pyridalyl
through food and water, which has already been addressed, and will not
be greater than the chronic aggregate risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Pyridalyl is
classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to humans'' by all
relevant routes of exposure based on adequate studies in mice and rats
and overall negative findings in various mutagenicity assays.
Therefore, pyridalyl 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 pyridalyl residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (gas chromatography/nitrogen-
phosphorus detector (GC/NPD) methods RM-38P-1-1, RM-38M-1, and RM-38M-
1-1 for plant commodities; and RM-38P-2 and RM-38P-3-1 for livestock
commodities) is available to enforce the tolerance expression. The
methods may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350;
telephone number: (410) 305-2905; e-mail address:
residuemethods@epa.gov. FDA multiresidue methods (protocols B, D, E,
and F) are also available for enforcement of the tolerances (PAM Vol.I,
Appendix II, 1/94).
[[Page 25533]]
B. International Residue Limits
There are currently no U.S. or international Codex tolerances
established for pyridalyl.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
Based on its review of submitted crop field trial data, EPA
determined that the proposed tolerances for Brassica head and stem,
subgroup 5A; and for fruiting vegetables, group 8 should be reduced to
3.5 and 1.0 ppm, respectively. The Agency determined also that the data
were not sufficient to support the proposed tolerance for Brassica
leafy greens, subgroup 5B; although a mustard green tolerance at 30 ppm
was supported by the data.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of pyridalyl per
se, in or on vegetables, leafy, except Brassica, group 4 at 20 ppm;
Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A at 3.5 ppm; vegetables, fruiting,
group 8 at 1.0 ppm; mustard greens at 30 ppm; and turnip greens at 30
ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances 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 final 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 9, 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).
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: April 23, 2008.
Debra Edwards,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. Section 180.640 is added to read as follows:
180.640 Pyridalyl; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of pyridalyl,
pyridine,2-[3-[2,6-dichloro-4-[(3,3-dichloro-2-
propenyl)oxy]phenoxy]propoxy]-5-(trifluoromethyl, in or on the
following raw agricultural commodities:)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A................. 3.5
Mustard greens....................................... 30
Turnip greens........................................ 30
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8......................... 1.0
Vegetables, leafy, except Brassica, group 4 20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemption. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registration. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
[FR Doc. E8-9823Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE6560-50-S