Bacillus thuringiensis Vip3Aa Proteins in Corn and Cotton; Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance, 45620-45624 [E8-17931]
Download as PDF
45620
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 6, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Port at telephone number 617–223–3008
or via on-scene patrol personnel on VHF
channel 16 to seek permission to do so.
If permission is granted, all persons and
vessels must comply with the
instructions of the Captain of the Port or
his or her designated representative.
Dated: July 24, 2008.
Claudia C. Gelzer,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting
Captain of the Port Boston, Massachusetts.
[FR Doc. E8–18076 Filed 8–5–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 174
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0830; FRL–8374–2]
Bacillus thuringiensis Vip3Aa Proteins
in Corn and Cotton; Exemption from
the Requirement of a Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of the Bacillus
thuringiensis Vip3Aa proteins in or on
the food and feed commodities of corn;
corn, field; corn, sweet; corn, pop; and
cotton; cotton, undelinted seed; cotton,
refined oil; cotton, meal; cotton, hay;
cotton, hulls; cotton, forage; and cotton,
gin byproducts, when used as plantincorporated protectants in those food
and feed commodities. Syngenta Seeds,
Inc. submitted a petition to EPA under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food
Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA),
requesting an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of Bacillus thuringiensis
Vip3Aa proteins in or on corn; corn,
field; corn, sweet; corn, pop; and cotton,
undelinted seed; cotton, refined oil;
cotton, meal; cotton, hay; cotton, hulls;
cotton, forage; and cotton, gin
byproducts, when applied or used as
plant-incorporated protectants.
DATES: This regulation is effective
August 6, 2008. Objections and requests
for hearings must be received on or
before October 6, 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–
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:49 Aug 05, 2008
Jkt 214001
OPP–2007–0830. 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:
Alan Reynolds, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 605–0515; e-mail address:
reynolds.alan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. If you have any
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies
of this Document?
In addition to accessing an electronic
copy of this Federal Register document
through the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may access
this ‘‘Federal Register’’ document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may
also access a frequently updated
electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
through the Government Printing
Office’s pilot e-CFR site at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing
Request?
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, as
amended by FQPA, any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this
regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. The EPA
procedural regulations which govern the
submission of objections and requests
for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178.
You must file your objection or request
a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2007–0830 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
requests must be in writing, and must be
mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk
on or before October 6, 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 your
copies, identified by docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0830, 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
E:\FR\FM\06AUR1.SGM
06AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 6, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
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. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of November
2, 2007 (72 FR 62237) (FRL–8153–8),
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 tolerance petition (PP 7F7254)
by Syngenta Seeds, Inc., P.O. Box
12257, 3054 E. Cornwallis Road,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. The
petition requested that 40 CFR part 180
be amended by establishing an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of Bacillus
thuringiensis Vip3Aa proteins in or on
all food commodities when applied or
used as plant-incorporated protectants.
This notice included a summary of the
petition prepared by the petitioner
Syngenta Seeds, Inc. One comment was
received in response to the notice of
filing. The commenter objected to the
petition and expressed concerns about
EPA’s regulation of human exposure to
toxic chemicals. The Agency
understands the commenter’s concerns
regarding toxic substances and the
potential effects to humans. Pursuant to
its authority under the FFDCA, and as
discussed further in this Unit, EPA
conducted a comprehensive assessment
of representative Vip3Aa proteins,
including a review of acute oral toxicity
data on several Vip3Aa proteins, amino
acid sequence comparisons to known
toxins and allergens, as well as data
demonstrating that the representative
Vip3Aa proteins are rapidly degraded
by gastric fluid in vitro, are not
glycosylated, and are present in low
levels in the tissues of the corn and
cotton plants containing these plantincorporated protectants. Based on these
data, the Agency has concluded that
there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result from dietary exposure
to residues of these proteins in or on the
food and feed commodities corn; corn,
field; corn, sweet; corn, pop; and cotton,
undelinted seed; cotton, refined oil;
cotton, meal; cotton, hay; cotton, hulls;
cotton, forage; and cotton, gin
byproducts, when used as plantincorporated protectants in those food
and feed commodities. Thus, under the
standard in FFDCA section 408(b)(2), a
tolerance exemption is appropriate.
In taking this action, EPA, pursuant to
its authority under section
408(d)(4)(A)(i) of the FFDCA, is issuing
a final regulation that varies from the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:49 Aug 05, 2008
Jkt 214001
regulation sought by petitioner Syngenta
Seeds, Inc. Specifically, instead of
issuing a tolerance exemption that
covers residues of the subject plantincorporated protectant in all food
commodities, EPA is issuing a tolerance
exemption that covers such residues in
those commodities in which it will be
used as a plant-incorporated protectant
– in this case, the food and feed
commodities of corn; corn, field; corn,
sweet; corn, pop; and cotton, undelinted
seed; cotton, refined oil; cotton, meal;
cotton, hay; cotton, hulls; cotton, forage;
and cotton, gin byproducts. In this way,
the tolerance exemption is coextensive
with the registered uses for this
particular plant-incorporated protectant.
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish an exemption
from the requirement for a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the exemption is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(c)(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. Pursuant to
section 408(c)(2)(B) of FFDCA, in
establishing or maintaining in effect an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance, EPA must take into account
the factors set forth in section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA, which require
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....’’
Additionally, section 408(b)(2)(D) of
FFDCA requires that 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 performs a number of analyses to
determine the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide residues. First,
EPA determines the toxicity of
pesticides. Second, EPA examines
exposure to the pesticide through food,
drinking water, and through other
exposures that occur as a result of
pesticide use in residential settings.
III. Toxicological Profile
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45621
available scientific data and other
relevant information in support of this
action and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability and the
relationship of this information 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.
Mammalian toxicity and allergenicity
assessment. Syngenta Seeds, Inc. has
submitted acute oral toxicity data
demonstrating the lack of mammalian
toxicity at high levels of exposure to the
Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 proteins.
These data demonstrate the safety of
these particular Vip3Aa proteins at
levels well above the maximum possible
exposure levels that are reasonably
anticipated in cotton (Vip3Aa19) and
corn (Vip3Aa20). Basing this conclusion
on acute oral toxicity data without
requiring further toxicity testing and
residue data is similar to the Agency
position regarding toxicity testing and
the requirement of residue data for the
microbial Bacillus thuringiensis
products from which these plantincorporated protectants were derived
(40 CFR 158.2140). For microbial
products, further toxicity testing (Tiers
II and III) and residue data are triggered
by significant adverse acute effects in
studies such as the mouse oral toxicity
study, to verify the observed adverse
effects and clarify the source of these
effects.
Syngenta submitted four acute oral
toxicity studies conducted on mice.
Three of the studies were conducted
with microbially-produced Vip3Aa
proteins (Vip3Aa1, Vip3Aa19, and
Vip3Aa20) with slight variations in
amino acid sequence (1-2 amino acid
differences), and one study was
conducted with transgenic corn leaf
tissue expressing Vip3Aa19 as the test
material. No treatment-related adverse
effects were observed in any of the
studies. The results of these studies
showed that the oral LD50 for mice
(males, females, and combined) was
greater than 3,675 milligrams/kilogram/
body weight (mg/kg/bwt) (the highest
dose tested) for the tested Vip3Aa
proteins.
When proteins are toxic, they are
known to act via acute mechanisms and
at very low dose levels (Sjoblad, Roy D.,
et al., ‘‘Toxicological Considerations for
Protein Components of Biological
Pesticide Products,’’ Regulatory
Toxicology and Pharmacology 15, pages
3–9 (1992)). Therefore, since no acute
effects were shown to be caused by the
Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 proteins, even
at relatively high dose levels, they are
not considered toxic. (This is also true
E:\FR\FM\06AUR1.SGM
06AUR1
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
45622
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 6, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
of the Vip3Aa1 protein that was tested.)
Further, amino acid sequence
comparisons showed no similarities
between Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20, on
the one hand, and known toxic proteins
in protein databases, on the other hand,
that would raise a safety concern.
Since Vip3Aa is a protein, allergenic
potential was also considered.
Currently, no definitive tests for
determining the allergenic potential of
novel proteins exist. Therefore, EPA
uses a weight-of-evidence approach,
where the following factors are
considered: Source of the trait; amino
acid sequence comparison with known
allergens; and biochemical properties of
the protein, including in vitro
digestibility in simulated gastric fluid
(SGF) and glycosylation. This approach
is consistent with the approach outlined
in the Annex to the Codex Alimentarius
‘‘Guideline for the Conduct of Food
Safety Assessment of Foods Derived
from Recombinant-DNA Plants.’’ The
allergenicity assessment for Vip3Aa
follows:
• Source of the trait. Bacillus
thuringiensis, the microorganism from
which Vip3Aa proteins are derived, is
not considered to be a source of
allergenic proteins.
• Amino acid sequence. A
comparison of the amino acid sequence
of Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 with known
allergens showed no significant
sequence identity over 80 amino acids
or identity at the level of eight
contiguous amino acid residues.
• Digestibility. Both Vip3Aa19 and
Vip3Aa20 proteins are digested rapidly
in simulated gastric fluid containing
pepsin.
• Glycosylation. Both Vip3Aa19 and
Vip3Aa20 were shown not to be
glycosylated.
Considering all of the available
information on Vip3Aa19 and
Vip3Aa20, EPA concludes that the
potential for these specific proteins to
be food allergens is minimal. Moreover,
as further explained below (and in
section VI.a. of this final rule), EPA
believes these data and the other
submitted data demonstrating a lack of
mammalian toxicity at high levels of
exposure to Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20
can be extrapolated to cover Vip3Aa
more generally.
Vip3Aa is the designation assigned to
a closely-related group of similar
insecticidal proteins isolated from
Bacillus thuringiensis. The specific
variants referred to throughout this
document (i.e., Vip3Aa19 and
Vip3Aa20) are isolates of Vip3Aa
protein. All Vip3Aa proteins (there are
25 known Vip3Aa proteins and there are
sequences available for 19 of these) are
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:49 Aug 05, 2008
Jkt 214001
highly related. Indeed, the amino acid
sequence of all the Vip3Aa proteins can
only vary up to 5% to be considered a
part of the Vip3Aa group. With respect
to the 19 Vip3Aa proteins for which
sequences are available, they vary by
less than 28 amino acids out of the 789
amino acids that make up the protein.
This level of sequence similarity makes
that group of 19 Vip3Aa protein variants
96% identical overall. The sequence
identity between any two individual
sequences is even higher. For example,
the sequences of the protein variants
tested by Syngenta (i.e., Vip3Aa19 and
Vip3Aa20) are over 99.7% identical.
Finally, as to the few amino acid
differences that do exist between the
Vip3Aa variants, these differences do
not alter the surrounding sequence,
rarely occur as contiguous amino acids,
and are often substitutions with similar
chemical side groups indicating similar
chemical functionality. Therefore, EPA
finds that none of the Vip3Aa variants
would be expected to have significant
amino acid sequence identity — which
is defined as either 35% identity over an
80 amino acid stretch and, for allergens,
at the level of eight contiguous amino
acids — with a toxin, an anti-nutrient or
an allergen.
This conclusion is further supported
by EPA’s overall safety assessment that
includes other considerations such as
the source of the trait, digestibility and
glycosylation. As noted in this Unit,
Bacillus thuringiensis (from which the
Vip3Aa proteins are derived) is not
considered to be a source of allergenic
proteins. Furthermore, since all the
Vip3Aa proteins have extremely
homogenous structural similarities (as
explained in this Unit), they are highly
likely to show similar biochemical
characteristics in terms of digestibility
and glycosylation. So, as is the case for
both Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20, EPA
expects that all Vip3Aa proteins will be
rapidly digested under simulated gastric
conditions and will not be glycosylated.
Finally, it is also highly relevant here
that microbial pesticide products, which
are distinct from plant-incorporated
protectant pesticide products,
containing Bacillus thuringiensis and its
components (which could include
microbially-expressed Vip3Aa proteins)
are already exempt from the
requirement for a tolerance under 40
CFR 180.1011.
Accordingly, EPA believes that the
foregoing supports EPA’s reasonable
certainty of no harm finding not only for
the Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 protein
variants, but also for all other closelyrelated members of the Vip3Aa
designation as described using the
Crickmore classification system
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(Crickmore, N., Zeigler, D.R., Schnepf,
E., Van Rie, J., Lereclus, D., Baum, J,
Bravo, A. and Dean, D.H. ‘‘Bacillus
thuringiensis toxin Nomenclature’’
(2007) https://www.lifesci.sussex.ac.uk/
Home/Neil_Crickmore/Bt/).
IV. Aggregate Exposures
In examining aggregate exposure,
section 408 of FFDCA directs EPA to
consider available information
concerning exposures from the pesticide
residue in food and all other nonoccupational exposures, including
drinking water from ground water or
surface water and exposure through
pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or
buildings (residential and other indoor
uses).
The Agency has considered available
information on the aggregate exposure
levels of consumers (and major
identifiable subgroups of consumers) to
the pesticide chemical residue (i.e., the
Vip3Aa proteins) and to other related
substances. These considerations
include dietary exposure under the
tolerance exemption and all other
tolerances or exemptions in effect for
the plant-incorporated protectant’s
chemical residue, and exposure from
non-occupational sources. Exposure via
the skin or inhalation is not likely since
the plant-incorporated protectant is
contained within plant cells, which
essentially eliminates these exposure
routes or reduces these exposure routes
to negligible. In addition, even if
exposure can occur through inhalation,
the potential for Vip3Aa to be an
allergen is low, as discussed in this
Unit. Although the allergenicity
assessment focuses on potential to be a
food allergen, the data also indicate a
low potential for Vip3Aa to be an
inhalation allergen. Exposure via
residential or lawn use to infants and
children is also not expected because
the use sites for Vip3Aa proteins are
agricultural. Oral exposure, at very low
levels, may occur from ingestion of food
commodities containing Vip3Aa protein
residues and, theoretically, drinking
water. However oral toxicity testing (as
discussed above) showed no adverse
effects.
V. Cumulative Effects
Pursuant to FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D)(v), EPA has considered
available information on the cumulative
effects of residues of representative
Vip3Aa proteins and other substances
that have a common mechanism of
toxicity. These considerations include
the cumulative effects on infants and
children of such residues and other
substances with a common mechanism
of toxicity. Because there is no
E:\FR\FM\06AUR1.SGM
06AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 6, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
indication of mammalian toxicity
resulting from exposure to Vip3Aa
proteins, we conclude that there are no
cumulative effects for the Vip3Aa
proteins.
VI. Determination of Safety for U.S.
Population, Infants and Children
1. Toxicity and allergenicity
conclusions. The data submitted and
cited regarding potential health effects
for Vip3Aa proteins includes the
characterization of representative
Vip3Aa proteins, as well as the acute
oral toxicity studies, amino acid
sequence comparisons to known
allergens and toxins, and in vitro
digestibility of the representative
Vip3Aa proteins. The results of these
studies were used to evaluate humansk,
and the validity, completeness, and
reliability of the available data from the
studies were also considered.
Adequate information was submitted
to show that the Vip3Aa test materials
derived from microbial cultures were
biochemically and functionally
equivalent to the proteins produced by
the plant-incorporated protectant
ingredient in the plants. Microbially
produced proteins were used in the
studies so that sufficient material for
testing was available.
The acute oral toxicity data submitted
for the representative Vip3Aa proteins
support the prediction that Vip3Aa
proteins will be non-toxic to humans.
As mentioned above, when proteins are
toxic, they are known to act via acute
mechanisms and at very low dose levels
(Sjoblad, Roy D., et al., ‘‘Toxicological
Considerations for Protein Components
of Biological Pesticide Products,’’
Regulatory Toxicology and
Pharmacology 15, pages 3–9 (1992)).
Since no treatment-related adverse
effects were shown to be caused by the
representative Vip3Aa proteins, even at
relatively high dose levels, Vip3Aa
proteins are not considered toxic.
Basing this conclusion on acute oral
toxicity data without requiring further
toxicity testing or residue data is similar
to the Agency position regarding
toxicity and the requirement of residue
data for the microbial Bacillus
thuringiensis products from which this
plant-incorporated protectant was
derived (see 40 CFR 158.2140). For
microbial products, further toxicity
testing (Tiers II and III) and residue data
are triggered when significant adverse
effects are seen in studies such as the
acute oral toxicity study. Further studies
verify the observed adverse effects and
clarify the source of these effects.
Residue chemistry data were not
required for a human health effects
assessment of the subject plant-
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:49 Aug 05, 2008
Jkt 214001
incorporated protectant ingredients
because of the lack of mammalian
toxicity. However, data submitted
demonstrated low levels of the
representative Vip3Aa proteins in corn
and cotton tissues.
Since Vip3Aa are proteins, potential
allergenicity is also considered as part
of the toxicity assessment. Considering
all of the available information,
including that:
• Vip3Aa originates from a nonallergenic source.
• Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 have no
sequence similarities with known
allergens.
• Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 are not
glycosylated.
• Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 are
rapidly digested in simulated gastric
fluid.
• The data developed for Vip3Aa19
and Vip3Aa20 can be extrapolated to all
Vip3Aa proteins due to the extremely
high level of structural similarity that
exists between and among Vip3Aa
proteins, EPA has concluded that the
potential for Vip3Aa to be an allergen is
minimal.
Neither available information
concerning the dietary consumption
patterns of consumers (and major
identifiable subgroups of consumers
including infants and children) nor
safety factors that are generally
recognized as appropriate for the use of
animal experimentation data were
evaluated. The lack of mammalian
toxicity at high levels of exposure to
representative Vip3Aa proteins, as well
as the minimal potential to be a food
allergen, demonstrate the safety of
Vip3Aa at levels well above possible
maximum exposure levels anticipated.
The genetic material necessary for the
production of the plant-incorporated
protectant active ingredient include the
deoxyribo nucleic acids/ribonucleic
acid (DNA/RNA) that encode these
proteins and regulatory regions. The
genetic material DNA/RNA necessary
for the production of Vip3Aa proteins
has been exempted from the
requirement of a tolerance under 40 CFR
174.507 (Nucleic acids that are part of
a plant-incorporated protectant;
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance).
2. Infants and children risk
conclusions. FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(C) provides that EPA shall
assess the available information about
consumption patterns among infants
and children, special susceptibility of
infants and children to pesticide
chemical residues and the cumulative
effects on infants and children of the
residues and other substances with a
common mechanism of toxicity. In
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45623
addition, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C)
also provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold margin of safety for
infants and children in the case of
threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database unless
EPA determines that a different margin
of safety will be safe for infants and
children.
In this instance, based on all the
available information, the Agency
concludes that there is a finding of no
toxicity for Vip3Aa proteins. Thus, there
are no threshold effects of concern and,
as a result, the provision requiring an
additional tenfold margin of safety does
not apply. Further, the considerations of
consumption patterns, special
susceptibility, and cumulative effects do
not apply.
3. Overall safety conclusion. There is
a reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
U.S. population, including infants and
children, to Vip3Aa proteins. This
includes all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information. The
Agency has arrived at this conclusion
because, as discussed above, no toxicity
to mammals has been observed, nor any
indication of allergenicity potential for
Vip3Aa proteins.
VII. Other Considerations
A. Endocrine Disruptors
The pesticidal active ingredient is a
protein, derived from a source that is
not known to exert an influence on the
endocrine system. Therefore, the
Agency is not requiring information on
the endocrine effects of the plantincorporated protectant at this time.
B. Analytical Method(s)
A lateral flow enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assay (ELISA) protocol
has been provided to the Agency for
detecting Vip3Aa in cotton as well as a
qualitative ELISA method for detecting
Vip3Aa in corn.
C. Codex Maximum Residue Level
No Codex maximum residue level
exists for the plant-incorporated
protectant Bacillus thuringiensis
Vip3Aa proteins and the genetic
material necessary for their production
in corn and cotton.
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
E:\FR\FM\06AUR1.SGM
06AUR1
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with RULES
45624
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 6, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:49 Aug 05, 2008
Jkt 214001
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
IX. Congressional Review Act
40 CFR Part 180
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).
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0484; FRL–8375–5]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 174
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: June 26, 2008.
Debra Edwards,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 174—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 174
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 174.501 in subpart D is
revised to read as follows:
I
§ 174.501 Bacillus thuringiensis Vip3Aa
protein in corn and cotton; exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance.
Residues of Bacillus thuringiensis
Vip3Aa proteins in or on corn or cotton
are exempt from the requirement of a
tolerance when used as plant–
incorporated protectants in or on the
food and feed commodities of corn;
corn, field; corn, sweet; corn, pop; and
cotton; cotton, undelinted seed; cotton,
refined oil; cotton, meal; cotton, hay;
cotton, hulls; cotton, forage; and cotton,
gin byproducts.
§ 174.528
[Removed]
3. Section 174.528 is removed from
Subpart D.
I
[FR Doc. E8–17931 Filed 8–5–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Difenoconazole; Pesticide Tolerances
for Emergency Exemptions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
time-limited tolerances for residues of
difenoconazole, 1-[2-[2-chloro-4-(4chlorophenoxy)phenyl]-4-methyl-1,3dioxolan-2-ylmethyl]-1H-1,2,4-triazole
in or on almond, almond hulls,
cantaloupe, cucumber, and watermelon.
This action is in response to EPA’s
granting crisis exemptions to the
California Environmental Protection
Agency and the Georgia Department of
Agriculture under section 18 of the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) authorizing
use of the pesticide on almond, almond
hulls, cantaloupe, cucumber, and
watermelon. This regulation establishes
a maximum permissible level for
residues of difenoconazole in these food
commodities. The time-limited
tolerances expire and are revoked on
December 31, 2011.
DATES: This regulation is effective
August 6, 2008. Objections and requests
for hearings must be received on or
before October 6, 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).
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2008–0484. 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 either in the electronic docket
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\06AUR1.SGM
06AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 6, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45620-45624]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17931]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 174
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0830; FRL-8374-2]
Bacillus thuringiensis Vip3Aa Proteins in Corn and Cotton;
Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of the Bacillus thuringiensis Vip3Aa
proteins in or on the food and feed commodities of corn; corn, field;
corn, sweet; corn, pop; and cotton; cotton, undelinted seed; cotton,
refined oil; cotton, meal; cotton, hay; cotton, hulls; cotton, forage;
and cotton, gin byproducts, when used as plant-incorporated protectants
in those food and feed commodities. Syngenta Seeds, Inc. submitted a
petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA),
requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of Bacillus thuringiensis Vip3Aa proteins in or on corn;
corn, field; corn, sweet; corn, pop; and cotton, undelinted seed;
cotton, refined oil; cotton, meal; cotton, hay; cotton, hulls; cotton,
forage; and cotton, gin byproducts, when applied or used as plant-
incorporated protectants.
DATES: This regulation is effective August 6, 2008. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 6, 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-2007-0830. 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: Alan Reynolds, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 605-0515; e-mail address: reynolds.alan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document?
In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this Federal
Register document through the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may access this ``Federal Register'' document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may also access a
frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 through the
Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR site at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, as amended by FQPA, any person may
file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request
a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural regulations which
govern the submission of objections and requests for hearings appear in
40 CFR part 178. You must file your objection or request a hearing on
this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0830 in the subject line on the first page of
your submission. All requests must be in writing, and must be mailed or
delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before October 6, 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 your copies, identified by docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0830, 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
[[Page 45621]]
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. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of November 2, 2007 (72 FR 62237) (FRL-
8153-8), 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 tolerance
petition (PP 7F7254) by Syngenta Seeds, Inc., P.O. Box 12257, 3054 E.
Cornwallis Road, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition
requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of Bacillus
thuringiensis Vip3Aa proteins in or on all food commodities when
applied or used as plant-incorporated protectants. This notice included
a summary of the petition prepared by the petitioner Syngenta Seeds,
Inc. One comment was received in response to the notice of filing. The
commenter objected to the petition and expressed concerns about EPA's
regulation of human exposure to toxic chemicals. The Agency understands
the commenter's concerns regarding toxic substances and the potential
effects to humans. Pursuant to its authority under the FFDCA, and as
discussed further in this Unit, EPA conducted a comprehensive
assessment of representative Vip3Aa proteins, including a review of
acute oral toxicity data on several Vip3Aa proteins, amino acid
sequence comparisons to known toxins and allergens, as well as data
demonstrating that the representative Vip3Aa proteins are rapidly
degraded by gastric fluid in vitro, are not glycosylated, and are
present in low levels in the tissues of the corn and cotton plants
containing these plant-incorporated protectants. Based on these data,
the Agency has concluded that there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result from dietary exposure to residues of these proteins in
or on the food and feed commodities corn; corn, field; corn, sweet;
corn, pop; and cotton, undelinted seed; cotton, refined oil; cotton,
meal; cotton, hay; cotton, hulls; cotton, forage; and cotton, gin
byproducts, when used as plant-incorporated protectants in those food
and feed commodities. Thus, under the standard in FFDCA section
408(b)(2), a tolerance exemption is appropriate.
In taking this action, EPA, pursuant to its authority under section
408(d)(4)(A)(i) of the FFDCA, is issuing a final regulation that varies
from the regulation sought by petitioner Syngenta Seeds, Inc.
Specifically, instead of issuing a tolerance exemption that covers
residues of the subject plant-incorporated protectant in all food
commodities, EPA is issuing a tolerance exemption that covers such
residues in those commodities in which it will be used as a plant-
incorporated protectant - in this case, the food and feed commodities
of corn; corn, field; corn, sweet; corn, pop; and cotton, undelinted
seed; cotton, refined oil; cotton, meal; cotton, hay; cotton, hulls;
cotton, forage; and cotton, gin byproducts. In this way, the tolerance
exemption is coextensive with the registered uses for this particular
plant-incorporated protectant.
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(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. Pursuant to section 408(c)(2)(B) of FFDCA, in
establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the factors set forth in
section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA, which require 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....'' Additionally, section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA requires that
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 performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the
toxicity of pesticides. Second, EPA examines exposure to the pesticide
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings.
III. Toxicological Profile
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability
and the relationship of this information 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.
Mammalian toxicity and allergenicity assessment. Syngenta Seeds,
Inc. has submitted acute oral toxicity data demonstrating the lack of
mammalian toxicity at high levels of exposure to the Vip3Aa19 and
Vip3Aa20 proteins. These data demonstrate the safety of these
particular Vip3Aa proteins at levels well above the maximum possible
exposure levels that are reasonably anticipated in cotton (Vip3Aa19)
and corn (Vip3Aa20). Basing this conclusion on acute oral toxicity data
without requiring further toxicity testing and residue data is similar
to the Agency position regarding toxicity testing and the requirement
of residue data for the microbial Bacillus thuringiensis products from
which these plant-incorporated protectants were derived (40 CFR
158.2140). For microbial products, further toxicity testing (Tiers II
and III) and residue data are triggered by significant adverse acute
effects in studies such as the mouse oral toxicity study, to verify the
observed adverse effects and clarify the source of these effects.
Syngenta submitted four acute oral toxicity studies conducted on
mice. Three of the studies were conducted with microbially-produced
Vip3Aa proteins (Vip3Aa1, Vip3Aa19, and Vip3Aa20) with slight
variations in amino acid sequence (1-2 amino acid differences), and one
study was conducted with transgenic corn leaf tissue expressing
Vip3Aa19 as the test material. No treatment-related adverse effects
were observed in any of the studies. The results of these studies
showed that the oral LD50 for mice (males, females, and
combined) was greater than 3,675 milligrams/kilogram/body weight (mg/
kg/bwt) (the highest dose tested) for the tested Vip3Aa proteins.
When proteins are toxic, they are known to act via acute mechanisms
and at very low dose levels (Sjoblad, Roy D., et al., ``Toxicological
Considerations for Protein Components of Biological Pesticide
Products,'' Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 15, pages 3-9
(1992)). Therefore, since no acute effects were shown to be caused by
the Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 proteins, even at relatively high dose
levels, they are not considered toxic. (This is also true
[[Page 45622]]
of the Vip3Aa1 protein that was tested.) Further, amino acid sequence
comparisons showed no similarities between Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20, on
the one hand, and known toxic proteins in protein databases, on the
other hand, that would raise a safety concern.
Since Vip3Aa is a protein, allergenic potential was also
considered. Currently, no definitive tests for determining the
allergenic potential of novel proteins exist. Therefore, EPA uses a
weight-of-evidence approach, where the following factors are
considered: Source of the trait; amino acid sequence comparison with
known allergens; and biochemical properties of the protein, including
in vitro digestibility in simulated gastric fluid (SGF) and
glycosylation. This approach is consistent with the approach outlined
in the Annex to the Codex Alimentarius ``Guideline for the Conduct of
Food Safety Assessment of Foods Derived from Recombinant-DNA Plants.''
The allergenicity assessment for Vip3Aa follows:
Source of the trait. Bacillus thuringiensis, the
microorganism from which Vip3Aa proteins are derived, is not considered
to be a source of allergenic proteins.
Amino acid sequence. A comparison of the amino acid
sequence of Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 with known allergens showed no
significant sequence identity over 80 amino acids or identity at the
level of eight contiguous amino acid residues.
Digestibility. Both Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 proteins are
digested rapidly in simulated gastric fluid containing pepsin.
Glycosylation. Both Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 were shown not
to be glycosylated.
Considering all of the available information on Vip3Aa19 and
Vip3Aa20, EPA concludes that the potential for these specific proteins
to be food allergens is minimal. Moreover, as further explained below
(and in section VI.a. of this final rule), EPA believes these data and
the other submitted data demonstrating a lack of mammalian toxicity at
high levels of exposure to Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 can be extrapolated to
cover Vip3Aa more generally.
Vip3Aa is the designation assigned to a closely-related group of
similar insecticidal proteins isolated from Bacillus thuringiensis. The
specific variants referred to throughout this document (i.e., Vip3Aa19
and Vip3Aa20) are isolates of Vip3Aa protein. All Vip3Aa proteins
(there are 25 known Vip3Aa proteins and there are sequences available
for 19 of these) are highly related. Indeed, the amino acid sequence of
all the Vip3Aa proteins can only vary up to 5% to be considered a part
of the Vip3Aa group. With respect to the 19 Vip3Aa proteins for which
sequences are available, they vary by less than 28 amino acids out of
the 789 amino acids that make up the protein. This level of sequence
similarity makes that group of 19 Vip3Aa protein variants 96% identical
overall. The sequence identity between any two individual sequences is
even higher. For example, the sequences of the protein variants tested
by Syngenta (i.e., Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20) are over 99.7% identical.
Finally, as to the few amino acid differences that do exist between the
Vip3Aa variants, these differences do not alter the surrounding
sequence, rarely occur as contiguous amino acids, and are often
substitutions with similar chemical side groups indicating similar
chemical functionality. Therefore, EPA finds that none of the Vip3Aa
variants would be expected to have significant amino acid sequence
identity -- which is defined as either 35% identity over an 80 amino
acid stretch and, for allergens, at the level of eight contiguous amino
acids -- with a toxin, an anti-nutrient or an allergen.
This conclusion is further supported by EPA's overall safety
assessment that includes other considerations such as the source of the
trait, digestibility and glycosylation. As noted in this Unit, Bacillus
thuringiensis (from which the Vip3Aa proteins are derived) is not
considered to be a source of allergenic proteins. Furthermore, since
all the Vip3Aa proteins have extremely homogenous structural
similarities (as explained in this Unit), they are highly likely to
show similar biochemical characteristics in terms of digestibility and
glycosylation. So, as is the case for both Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20, EPA
expects that all Vip3Aa proteins will be rapidly digested under
simulated gastric conditions and will not be glycosylated. Finally, it
is also highly relevant here that microbial pesticide products, which
are distinct from plant-incorporated protectant pesticide products,
containing Bacillus thuringiensis and its components (which could
include microbially-expressed Vip3Aa proteins) are already exempt from
the requirement for a tolerance under 40 CFR 180.1011.
Accordingly, EPA believes that the foregoing supports EPA's
reasonable certainty of no harm finding not only for the Vip3Aa19 and
Vip3Aa20 protein variants, but also for all other closely-related
members of the Vip3Aa designation as described using the Crickmore
classification system (Crickmore, N., Zeigler, D.R., Schnepf, E., Van
Rie, J., Lereclus, D., Baum, J, Bravo, A. and Dean, D.H. ``Bacillus
thuringiensis toxin Nomenclature'' (2007) https://
www.lifesci.sussex.ac.uk/Home/Neil_Crickmore/Bt/).
IV. Aggregate Exposures
In examining aggregate exposure, section 408 of FFDCA directs EPA
to consider available information concerning exposures from the
pesticide residue in food and all other non-occupational exposures,
including drinking water from ground water or surface water and
exposure through pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or buildings
(residential and other indoor uses).
The Agency has considered available information on the aggregate
exposure levels of consumers (and major identifiable subgroups of
consumers) to the pesticide chemical residue (i.e., the Vip3Aa
proteins) and to other related substances. These considerations include
dietary exposure under the tolerance exemption and all other tolerances
or exemptions in effect for the plant-incorporated protectant's
chemical residue, and exposure from non-occupational sources. Exposure
via the skin or inhalation is not likely since the plant-incorporated
protectant is contained within plant cells, which essentially
eliminates these exposure routes or reduces these exposure routes to
negligible. In addition, even if exposure can occur through inhalation,
the potential for Vip3Aa to be an allergen is low, as discussed in this
Unit. Although the allergenicity assessment focuses on potential to be
a food allergen, the data also indicate a low potential for Vip3Aa to
be an inhalation allergen. Exposure via residential or lawn use to
infants and children is also not expected because the use sites for
Vip3Aa proteins are agricultural. Oral exposure, at very low levels,
may occur from ingestion of food commodities containing Vip3Aa protein
residues and, theoretically, drinking water. However oral toxicity
testing (as discussed above) showed no adverse effects.
V. Cumulative Effects
Pursuant to FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D)(v), EPA has considered
available information on the cumulative effects of residues of
representative Vip3Aa proteins and other substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity. These considerations include the cumulative
effects on infants and children of such residues and other substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity. Because there is no
[[Page 45623]]
indication of mammalian toxicity resulting from exposure to Vip3Aa
proteins, we conclude that there are no cumulative effects for the
Vip3Aa proteins.
VI. Determination of Safety for U.S. Population, Infants and Children
1. Toxicity and allergenicity conclusions. The data submitted and
cited regarding potential health effects for Vip3Aa proteins includes
the characterization of representative Vip3Aa proteins, as well as the
acute oral toxicity studies, amino acid sequence comparisons to known
allergens and toxins, and in vitro digestibility of the representative
Vip3Aa proteins. The results of these studies were used to evaluate
humansk, and the validity, completeness, and reliability of the
available data from the studies were also considered.
Adequate information was submitted to show that the Vip3Aa test
materials derived from microbial cultures were biochemically and
functionally equivalent to the proteins produced by the plant-
incorporated protectant ingredient in the plants. Microbially produced
proteins were used in the studies so that sufficient material for
testing was available.
The acute oral toxicity data submitted for the representative
Vip3Aa proteins support the prediction that Vip3Aa proteins will be
non-toxic to humans. As mentioned above, when proteins are toxic, they
are known to act via acute mechanisms and at very low dose levels
(Sjoblad, Roy D., et al., ``Toxicological Considerations for Protein
Components of Biological Pesticide Products,'' Regulatory Toxicology
and Pharmacology 15, pages 3-9 (1992)). Since no treatment-related
adverse effects were shown to be caused by the representative Vip3Aa
proteins, even at relatively high dose levels, Vip3Aa proteins are not
considered toxic. Basing this conclusion on acute oral toxicity data
without requiring further toxicity testing or residue data is similar
to the Agency position regarding toxicity and the requirement of
residue data for the microbial Bacillus thuringiensis products from
which this plant-incorporated protectant was derived (see 40 CFR
158.2140). For microbial products, further toxicity testing (Tiers II
and III) and residue data are triggered when significant adverse
effects are seen in studies such as the acute oral toxicity study.
Further studies verify the observed adverse effects and clarify the
source of these effects.
Residue chemistry data were not required for a human health effects
assessment of the subject plant-incorporated protectant ingredients
because of the lack of mammalian toxicity. However, data submitted
demonstrated low levels of the representative Vip3Aa proteins in corn
and cotton tissues.
Since Vip3Aa are proteins, potential allergenicity is also
considered as part of the toxicity assessment. Considering all of the
available information, including that:
Vip3Aa originates from a non-allergenic source.
Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 have no sequence similarities with
known allergens.
Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 are not glycosylated.
Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 are rapidly digested in simulated
gastric fluid.
The data developed for Vip3Aa19 and Vip3Aa20 can be
extrapolated to all Vip3Aa proteins due to the extremely high level of
structural similarity that exists between and among Vip3Aa proteins,
EPA has concluded that the potential for Vip3Aa to be an allergen is
minimal.
Neither available information concerning the dietary consumption
patterns of consumers (and major identifiable subgroups of consumers
including infants and children) nor safety factors that are generally
recognized as appropriate for the use of animal experimentation data
were evaluated. The lack of mammalian toxicity at high levels of
exposure to representative Vip3Aa proteins, as well as the minimal
potential to be a food allergen, demonstrate the safety of Vip3Aa at
levels well above possible maximum exposure levels anticipated.
The genetic material necessary for the production of the plant-
incorporated protectant active ingredient include the deoxyribo nucleic
acids/ribonucleic acid (DNA/RNA) that encode these proteins and
regulatory regions. The genetic material DNA/RNA necessary for the
production of Vip3Aa proteins has been exempted from the requirement of
a tolerance under 40 CFR 174.507 (Nucleic acids that are part of a
plant-incorporated protectant; exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance).
2. Infants and children risk conclusions. FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(C) provides that EPA shall assess the available information
about consumption patterns among infants and children, special
susceptibility of infants and children to pesticide chemical residues
and the cumulative effects on infants and children of the residues and
other substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. In addition,
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) also provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the database unless EPA determines
that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and
children.
In this instance, based on all the available information, the
Agency concludes that there is a finding of no toxicity for Vip3Aa
proteins. Thus, there are no threshold effects of concern and, as a
result, the provision requiring an additional tenfold margin of safety
does not apply. Further, the considerations of consumption patterns,
special susceptibility, and cumulative effects do not apply.
3. Overall safety conclusion. There is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the U.S. population,
including infants and children, to Vip3Aa proteins. This includes all
anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there
is reliable information. The Agency has arrived at this conclusion
because, as discussed above, no toxicity to mammals has been observed,
nor any indication of allergenicity potential for Vip3Aa proteins.
VII. Other Considerations
A. Endocrine Disruptors
The pesticidal active ingredient is a protein, derived from a
source that is not known to exert an influence on the endocrine system.
Therefore, the Agency is not requiring information on the endocrine
effects of the plant-incorporated protectant at this time.
B. Analytical Method(s)
A lateral flow enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) protocol
has been provided to the Agency for detecting Vip3Aa in cotton as well
as a qualitative ELISA method for detecting Vip3Aa in corn.
C. Codex Maximum Residue Level
No Codex maximum residue level exists for the plant-incorporated
protectant Bacillus thuringiensis Vip3Aa proteins and the genetic
material necessary for their production in corn and cotton.
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
[[Page 45624]]
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).
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 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 174
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 26, 2008.
Debra Edwards,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 174--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 174 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. Section 174.501 in subpart D is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 174.501 Bacillus thuringiensis Vip3Aa protein in corn and
cotton; exemption from the requirement of a tolerance.
Residues of Bacillus thuringiensis Vip3Aa proteins in or on corn or
cotton are exempt from the requirement of a tolerance when used as
plant-incorporated protectants in or on the food and feed commodities
of corn; corn, field; corn, sweet; corn, pop; and cotton; cotton,
undelinted seed; cotton, refined oil; cotton, meal; cotton, hay;
cotton, hulls; cotton, forage; and cotton, gin byproducts.
Sec. 174.528 [Removed]
0
3. Section 174.528 is removed from Subpart D.
[FR Doc. E8-17931 Filed 8-5-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S