Chlorantraniliprole; Proposed Time-Limited Pesticide Tolerance, 57040-57046 [E8-22946]
Download as PDF
ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
57040
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 1, 2008 / Proposed Rules
(4) In the event that a record company
authorizes promotional uses in excess of
the time limitations of paragraph (b) of
this section, the record company, and
not the third-party service it has
authorized, shall be liable for any
payment due for such uses; provided,
however, that all rights and remedies of
the copyright owner with respect to
unauthorized uses shall be preserved. In
the event that a third-party service
exceeds the scope of any authorization
by a record company, the service, and
not the record company, shall be liable
for any payment due for such uses;
provided, however, that all rights and
remedies of the copyright owner with
respect to unauthorized uses shall be
preserved.
(c) Interactive streaming of full-length
musical works through record company
and artist services. In addition to those
of paragraph (a) of this section, the
provisions of this paragraph (c) apply to
interactive streaming conducted or
authorized by record companies under
the promotional royalty rate through a
service (e.g., a Web site) directly owned
or operated by the record company, or
directly owned or operated by a
recording artist under the authorization
of the record company, and that is not
subject to paragraph (d) of this section.
For the avoidance of doubt and without
limitation, an artist page or site on a
third-party service (e.g., a social
networking service) shall not be
considered a service operated by the
record company or artist. Such
interactive streams may be made or
authorized by a record company under
the promotional royalty rate only if—
(1) The interactive streaming subject
to this paragraph (c) of a particular
sound recording is offered or authorized
by the record company on no more than
90 days total for all services (i.e.,
interactive streaming under this
paragraph (c) of a particular sound
recording may be authorized on no more
than a total of 90 days, which need not
be consecutive, and on any such day,
interactive streams may be offered on
one or more services operated by the
record company or artist, subject to the
provisions of paragraph (b)(2) of this
section); provided, however, that an
additional 90 days shall be available
each time the sound recording is rereleased by the record company in a
remastered form or as part of a
compilation with a different set of
sound recordings than prior
compilations that include that sound
recording;
(2) In the case of interactive streaming
through a service devoted to one
featured artist, the interactive streams
subject to this paragraph (c) of this
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Sep 30, 2008
Jkt 217001
section of a particular sound recording
are made or authorized by the record
company on no more than one official
artist site per artist and are recordings
of that artist; and
(3) In the case of interactive streaming
through a service that is not limited to
a single featured artist, all interactive
streaming on such service (whether
eligible for the promotional royalty rate
or not) is limited to sound recordings of
a single record company and its
affiliates and the service would not
reasonably be considered to be a
meaningful substitute for a paid music
service.
(d) Interactive streaming of clips. In
addition to those in paragraph (a) of this
section, the provisions of this paragraph
(d) apply to interactive streaming
conducted or authorized by record
companies under the promotional
royalty rate of segments of sound
recordings of musical works with a
playing time that does not exceed the
greater of
(1) 30 seconds, or
(2) 10% of the playing time of the
complete sound recording, but in no
event in excess of 60 seconds. Such
interactive streams may be made or
authorized by a record company under
the promotional royalty rate without
any of the temporal limitations set forth
in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section
(but subject to the other conditions of
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, as
applicable). For clarity, this paragraph
(d) is strictly limited to the uses
described herein and shall not be
construed as permitting the creation or
use of an excerpt of a musical work in
violation of 17 U.S.C. 106(2) or 115(a)(2)
or any other right of a musical work
owner.
(e) Activities prior to the publication
date. Notwithstanding paragraphs (a)
through (d) of this section, in the case
of licensed activity prior to the
publication date, the promotional
royalty rate shall apply to promotional
interactive streams, and to limited
downloads offered in the context of a
free trial period for a digital music
subscription service, that in either case
are authorized by the relevant record
company, if the condition set forth in
paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section is
satisfied, subject only to the additional
condition in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section, and provided that a free trial
period for a digital music subscription
service authorized by the relevant
record company shall be considered to
be of 30 days’ duration. In the event of
a dispute concerning the eligibility of
licensed activity prior to the publication
date for the promotional royalty rate, a
service asserting that its licensed
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
activity is eligible for the promotional
royalty rate shall bear the burden of
proving that its licensed activity was
authorized by the relevant record
company and shall certify that the
condition in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section was satisfied.
§ 385.15
Timing of payments.
Payment for any accounting period for
which payment otherwise would be due
more than 180 days after the publication
date shall be due as otherwise provided
under 17 U.S.C. 115 and its
implementing regulations. Payment for
any prior accounting period shall be due
180 days after the publication date.
§ 385.16 Reproduction and distribution
rights covered.
A compulsory license under 17 U.S.C.
115 extends to all reproduction and
distribution rights that may be necessary
for the provision of the licensed activity,
solely for the purpose of providing such
licensed activity (and no other purpose).
§ 385.17
Effect of rates.
In any future proceedings under 17
U.S.C. 115(c)(3)(C) and (D), the royalty
rates payable for a compulsory license
shall be established de novo.
Dated: September 25, 2008.
James Scott Sledge,
Chief Copyright Royalty Judge.
[FR Doc. E8–23184 Filed 9–30–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–72–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0647; FRL–8382–4]
Chlorantraniliprole; Proposed TimeLimited Pesticide Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document proposes to
establish time-limited tolerances for
residues of chlorantraniliprole in or on
cowpeas, forage and hay; field peas,
vines and hay; forage, fodder and straw
of cereal grains, crop group 16; grass
forage, fodder and hay, crop group 17;
leaves of root and tuber vegetables, crop
group 2, leeks, nongrass animal feeds
(forage, fodder, straw and hay), crop
group 18; okra; onions, green; onions,
Welsh; peanuts, hay; shallots; soybeans,
forage and hay; strawberries and
sugarcane, sugar under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
The tolerances expire on April 25, 2010.
E:\FR\FM\01OCP1.SGM
01OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 1, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Comments must be received on
or before December 1, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0647, 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
Facility’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.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–
0647. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the docket
without change and may be made
available on-line at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov website is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through
regulations.gov, your e-mail address
will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is
placed in the docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an
electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other
contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the docket index available
ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
DATES:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Sep 30, 2008
Jkt 217001
at https://www.regulations.gov. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., 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 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
hours of operation of this Docket
Facility are 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:
Kable Bo Davis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave, NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 306–0415; e-mail address:
davis.kable@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. What Should I Consider as I Prepare
My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark
the part or all of the information that
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57041
you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD-ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD-ROM the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for preparing your comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
i. Identify the document by docket ID
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
ii. Follow directions. The Agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
iii. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
iv. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
v. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
vi. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns and suggest
alternatives.
vii. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
viii. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
EPA on its own initiative, under
section 408(e) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(e), is proposing to establish a
tolerances for residues of the insecticide
chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4chloro-2-methyl-6[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5carboxamide, in or on cowpeas, forage
and hay at 0.20 parts per million (ppm);
field peas, vines and hay at 0.20 ppm;
forage, fodder and straw of cereal grains,
crop group 16 at 0.20 ppm, grass forage,
fodder and hay, crop group 17 at 0.20
ppm; leaves of root and tuber
vegetables, crop group 2 at 0.20 ppm;
leeks at 0.20 ppm; nongrass animal
feeds (forage, fodder, straw and hay),
crop group 18 at 0.20 ppm; okra at 0.70
ppm; onions, green at 0.20 ppm; onions,
E:\FR\FM\01OCP1.SGM
01OCP1
ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
57042
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 1, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Welsh at 0.20 ppm; peanuts, hay at 0.20
ppm; shallots at 0.20 ppm; soybeans,
forage and hay at 0.20 ppm; strawberries
at 1.2 ppm; and sugarcane, sugar at 0.20
ppm.
Recently, EPA established tolerances
for chlorantraniliprole on apple, wet
pomace; brassica, head and stem,
subgroup 5A; brassica, leafy greens,
subgroup 5B; cotton, gin byproduct;
cotton, hulls; cotton undelinted seed;
fruit, pome, group 11; fruit, stone, group
12; grape; grape, raisen; potato;
vegetable, cucurbit, group 9; vegetable,
fruiting, group 8; vegetable, leafy, except
brassica, group 4; milk; meat; meat
byproduct and fat. At that time EPA
determined rotational crop tolerances
were required, and that the petitioner
needed to conduct extensive field
rotational crop trials. The Agency
concluded that until the requested data
are submitted, a restriction should be
imposed on labels prohibiting the
rotation to any crop not on the label. In
response, the registrant submitted
proposals for the establishment of
tolerances for inadvertent residues for a
number of crops pending submission of
the requested data. After considering the
registrant’s submission, EPA is now
proposing time-limited tolerances to
address rotated crops.
EPA has decided to propose timelimited rotational crop tolerances for
chlorantraniliprole. Rotational crop
trials (2003, 2004, 2005) were conducted
in Canada and the United States on
leafy vegetables (Swiss chard, lettuce,
spinach), root vegetables (radish, beet,
turnip), cereal grains (wheat, oat) and
soybean. Based on the data on
chlorantraniliprole, the Agency believes
that the residue data would not
underestimate residues on rotated crops.
Thus the Agency believes that the 0.20
ppm tolerances on rotational crops are
appropriate and protective. EPA also
determined that adding these proposed
tolerances would not change its prior
safety finding for chlorantraniliprole.
EPA’s updated risk assessment can be
found at https://www.regulations.gov in
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–
0647.
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Sep 30, 2008
Jkt 217001
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. . . . ’’
EPA performs a number of analyses to
determine the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide residues. For
further discussion of the regulatory
requirements of section 408 of the
FFDCA and a complete description of
the risk assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/
November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other
relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess
the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure,
consistent with section 408(b)(2) of
FFDCA, for a tolerance for residues of
chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4chloro-2-methyl-6[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5carboxamide, in or on cowpeas, forage
and hay at 0.20 ppm; field peas, vines
and hay at 0.20 ppm; forage, fodder and
straw of cereal grains, crop group 16 at
0.20 ppm, grass forage, fodder and hay,
crop group 17 at 0.20 ppm; leaves of
root and tuber vegetables, crop group 2
at 0.20 ppm; leeks at 0.20 ppm; nongrass
animal feeds (forage, fodder, straw and
hay), crop group 18 at 0.20 ppm; okra
at 0.70 ppm; onions, green at 0.20 ppm;
onions, Welsh at 0.20 ppm; peanuts, hay
at 0.20 ppm; shallots at 0.20 ppm;
soybeans, forage and hay at 0.20 ppm;
strawberries at 1.20 ppm; and
sugarcane, sugar at 0.20 ppm. EPA’s
assessment of exposures and risks
associated with establishing the
tolerance follows:
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
Chlorantraniliprole has no significant
acute toxicity via the oral, dermal, and
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
inhalation routes of exposure. This
substance is not an eye or skin irritant
and does not cause skin sensitization. In
short-term studies, the most consistent
effects are those associated with non
adverse pharmacological response to the
xenobiotic, induction of liver enzymes
and subsequent increase in liver
weights. Chlorantraniliprole is not
genotoxic, neurotoxic, immunotoxic,
carcinogenic, or teratogenic.
Furthermore, it is not uniquely toxic to
the conceptus as there were no maternal
or fetal effects in studies conducted in
rats and rabbits. Based on the results of
a 28–day dermal study in rats, as well
as the dermal LD50 study,
chlorantraniliprole has relatively low
dermal toxicity.
Overall, chlorantraniliprole exhibits
minimal mammalian toxicity after longterm exposure. The only consistent
observation in the mammalian
toxicology studies is an increased
degree of microvesiculation of the
adrenal cortex after dermal or dietary
administration of chlorantraniliprole.
Based on the lack of adverse effect on
the function of the adrenal gland, this
observation was considered treatment
related, but not ‘‘adverse.’’In addition to
the adrenal effects, liver effects (e.g.,
increased liver weight and induction of
cytochrome P450 enzymes) were
reported in the 90–day oral subchronic
studies across species and only at the
highest dose tested (HDT) >1,000
milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day).
While in the subchronic studies, these
effects were considered adaptive, the
liver effects were more pronounced in
the 18–month chronic mouse study at
the HDT. Increased eosinophilic foci
(preneoplastic foci) were noted in male
mice at 935 mg/kg/day and liver
hypertrophy and weight increase were
evident at the next lower dose (158 mg/
kg/day), but progression to tumors was
not apparent for these effects. Therefore,
the eosinophilic foci appear to be an
adverse effect only seen in the HDT and
was graded minimal in severity.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the toxic
effects caused by chlorantraniliprole as
well as the no-observed-adverse-effectlevel (NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov. The referenced
document is available in the docket
established by this action, which is
described under ADDRESSES, and is
identified as EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0275
in that docket.
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold
below which there is no appreciable
E:\FR\FM\01OCP1.SGM
01OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 1, 2008 / Proposed Rules
risk, the toxicological level of concern
(LOC) is derived from the highest dose
at which no adverse effects are observed
(the NOAEL) in the toxicology study
identified as appropriate for use in risk
assessment. However, if a NOAEL
cannot be determined, the lowest dose
at which adverse effects of concern are
identified (the LOAEL) is sometimes
used for risk assessment. Uncertainty/
safety factors (UFs) are used in
conjunction with the LOC to take into
account uncertainties inherent in the
extrapolation from laboratory animal
data to humans and in the variations in
sensitivity among members of the
human population as well as other
unknowns. Safety is assessed for acute
and chronic risks by comparing
aggregate exposure to the pesticide to
the acute population adjusted dose
(aPAD) and chronic population adjusted
dose (cPAD). The aPAD and cPAD are
calculated by dividing the LOC by all
applicable UFs. Short-term,
intermediate-term, and long-term risks
are evaluated by comparing aggregate
exposure to the LOC to ensure that the
margin of exposure (MOE) called for by
the product of all applicable UFs is not
exceeded.
For non-threshold risks, the Agency
assumes that any amount of exposure
will lead to some degree of risk and
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of occurrence of additional adverse
cases. Generally, cancer risks are
considered non-threshold. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/
November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for chlorantraniliprole used
for human risk assessment can be found
at https://www.regulations.gov in
document Chlorantraniliprole (DPXE2Y45): Human Health Risk Assessment
for Proposed Uses on pome fruit, stone
fruit, leafy vegetables, brassica leafy
vegetables, cucurbit vegetables, fruiting
vegetables, cotton, grapes, potatoes,
rice, turf and ornamentals pages 22–24
in docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2007–0275.
ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to chlorantraniliprole, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing chlorantraniliprole tolerances
in (40 CFR 180.628). EPA assessed
dietary exposures from
chlorantraniliprole in food as follows:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Sep 30, 2008
Jkt 217001
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 chlorantraniliprole; 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
Agriculture (USDA) 1994–1996 and
1998 CSFII. As to residue levels in food,
EPA assumed all foods for which there
are tolerances were treated and contain
tolerance-level residues.
The inclusion of additional livestock
feeds such as forage, fodder and straw
from cowpea, field pea, soybean, cereal
grains, nongrass animal feeds or peanut
does not increase the livestock dietary
burdens and thus the meat and milk
tolerances. While the addition of
strawberries, sugarcane, leek, onions,
shallot, and okra that are considered
human food results in a miniscule
increase in exposure, a DEEM analysis
that incorporates all the new
commodities does not change the risk
outcome which remains at 1% of the
cPAD for the most highly exposed
population, children ages 1-2. In
addition, the dietary exposure from
leeks, onions and shallots is negligible.
iii. Cancer. Because
chlorantraniliprole has been classified
as a ‘‘not likely human carcinogen’’, a
quantitative exposure assessment
relative to cancer risk is not necessary.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency lacks sufficient
monitoring data to complete a
comprehensive dietary exposure
analysis and risk assessment for
chlorantraniliprole in drinking water.
Because the Agency does not have
comprehensive monitoring data,
drinking water concentration estimates
are made by reliance on simulation or
modeling taking into account data on
the environmental fate characteristics of
chlorantraniliprole. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCIGROW) models, the estimated
environmental concentrations (EECs) of
chlorantraniliprole for acute exposures
are estimated to be 26.862 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and 1.06
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57043
ppb for ground water. The EECs for
chronic exposures are estimated to be
3.650 ppb for surface water and 1.06
ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model.
Because no acute hazard, attributable to
a single dose, was identified; acute
dietary risk was not assessed. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration value 3.650 ppb
was used to access the contribution to
drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
Chlorantraniliprole is registered for
use on the following residential nondietary sites: Turfgrass and ornamental
plants. Although residential exposure
could occur, due to the lack of toxicity
identified for short-term and
intermediate-term durations via the
relevant routes of exposure, no risk is
expected from these exposures.
Additional information on residential
exposure assumptions can be found at
www.regulations.gov (Docket ID EPA–
HQ–OPP–2007–0275, pages 36 through
37).
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.’’
Unlike other pesticides for which EPA
has followed a cumulative risk approach
based on a common mechanism of
toxicity, EPA has not made a common
mechanism of toxicity finding as to
chlorantraniliprole and any other
substances and chlorantraniliprole does
not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has not assumed that
chlorantraniliprole has a common
mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding
EPA’s efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism
of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals,
see the policy statements released by
EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs
concerning common mechanism
determinations and procedures for
cumulating effects from substances
E:\FR\FM\01OCP1.SGM
01OCP1
57044
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 1, 2008 / Proposed Rules
ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
found to have a common mechanism on
EPA’s website at https://www.epa.gov/
pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA
provides that EPA shall apply an
additional (10X) tenfold margin of safety
for infants and children in the case of
threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA safety factor. In applying this
provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X when reliable data do not
support the choice of a different factor,
or, if reliable data are available, EPA
uses a different additional FQPA safety
factor value based on the use of
traditional UFs and/or special FQPA
safety factors, as appropriate.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There were no effects on fetal growth or
postnatal development up to the limit
dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day in rats or
rabbits in the developmental or 2generation reproduction studies.
Additionally, there were no treatment
related effects on the numbers of litters,
fetuses (live or dead), resorptions, sex
ratio, or post-implantation loss and no
effects on fetal body weights, skeletal
ossification, and external, visceral, or
skeletal malformations or variations.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show that it would be
safe for infants and children to reduce
the FQPA safety factor to 1X. That
decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicology database for
chlorantraniliprole is complete for the
purposes of this risk assessment and the
characterization of potential prenatal
and postnatal risks to infants and
children.
ii. No susceptibility was identified in
the toxicological database, and there are
no residual uncertainties re: prenatal
and/or postnatal exposure.
iii. There are no treatment-related
neurotoxic findings in the acute and
subchronic oral neurotoxicity studies in
rats.
iv. The exposure assessment is
protective: The dietary food exposure
assessment utilizes tolerance level
residues and 100 percent crop treated
(PCT) information for all commodities.
The submitted field rotational crop
studies do not match those
recommended in the guidelines.
However, data from confined rotational
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Sep 30, 2008
Jkt 217001
crop studies and field rotational crop
studies show that uptake of
chlorantraniliprole is below the
quantification level in roots and grains,
and range of 0.01 to 0.15 ppm in tops
of root vegetables and forage, fodder and
straw of cereal grains and soybean. The
0.20 ppm tolerances based on the
collective data should be conservative.
Also, the tolerances on rotational crops
strawberry and okra are conservative
since the strawberry tolerance is based
on residues in grape from direct
application of chlorantraniliprole and
the okra tolerance is based on residues
resulting from direct treatment on
tomato and pepper. An exposure
assessment using conservative residue
values is expected to be protective.
The drinking water assessment
utilizes values generated by models and
associated modeling parameters which
are designed to provide conservative,
health protective, high-end estimates of
water concentrations. By using these
screening-level exposure assessments,
the chronic dietary (food and drinking
water) risk is not underestimated.
v. Although residential exposure is
expected over the short- and possibly
intermediate-term (via the dermal and/
or incidental oral route), there is no
hazard expected via these routes/
durations, and therefore no risk for
these scenarios.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
Safety is assessed for acute and
chronic risks by comparing aggregate
exposure to the pesticide to the aPAD
and cPAD. The aPAD and cPAD are
calculated by dividing the LOC by all
applicable UFs. For linear cancer risks,
EPA calculates the probability of
additional cancer cases given aggregate
exposure. Short-term, intermediateterm, and long-term risks are evaluated
by comparing aggregate exposure to the
LOC to ensure that the MOE called for
by the product of all applicable UFs is
not exceeded.
1. Acute risk. No acute risk is
expected because no acute hazard,
attributable to a single dose, was
identified.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that exposure to chlorantraniliprole
from food and water will utilize <1% of
the cPAD for the population group
children 1-2 years (the highest exposed
subpopulation). Based the use pattern,
chronic residential exposure to residues
of chlorantraniliprole is not expected.
3. Short-term/intermediate risk. Shortterm aggregate and intermediate-term
exposure takes into account residential
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a
background exposure level).
There is potential for short-term and
intermediate-term post-application
dermal (adults and children) and
incidental oral (children only) exposure
to chlorantraniliprole. However, due to
the lack of toxicity via dermal route, as
well as the lack of toxicity over the
acute, short-term and intermediate-term
via the oral route - no risk is expected
from these exposures. Inhalation
exposure is not expected due to the low
vapor pressure of chlorantraniliprole (so
applied/deposited residues are not
expected to volatilize into the air).
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Chlorantraniliprole has
been classified as a ‘‘not likely human
carcinogen.’’ It is not expected to pose
a cancer risk to humans.
5. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to
chlorantraniliprole residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
liquid chromatography/mass
spectrometry (LC/MS) 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; email address: residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
There are no international residue
limits that affect the Agency’s
recommendations at this time. There are
no CODEX or Mexican maximum
residue limits (MRLs) for
chlorantraniliprole that exists at this
time.
C. Conditions
Tolerances may be made permanent
following submission of rotational crop
residue data suitable for establishing
tolerances.
V. Conclusion
Time-limited tolerances are proposed
for residues of chlorantraniliprole, 3bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5carboxamide, in or on cowpea, forage
and hay at 0.20 ppm; field pea, vines
and hay at 0.20 ppm; forage, fodder and
straw of cereal grains, crop group 16 at
0.20 ppm, grass forage, fodder and hay,
E:\FR\FM\01OCP1.SGM
01OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 1, 2008 / Proposed Rules
crop group 17 at 0.20 ppm; leaves of
root and tuber vegetables, crop group 2
at 0.20 ppm; leek at 0.20 ppm; nongrass
animal feeds (forage, fodder, straw and
hay), crop group 18 at 0.20 ppm; okra
at 0.70 ppm; onion, green at 0.20 ppm;
onion, Welsh at 0.20 ppm; peanut, hay
at 0.20 ppm; shallot at 0.20 ppm;
soybean, forage and hay at 0.20 ppm;
strawberries at 1.20 ppm; and
sugarcane, sugar at 0.20 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This proposed 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 proposed rule has been
exempted from review under Executive
Order 12866 due to its lack of
significance, this proposed rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This proposed rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any
enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public
Law 104–4). Nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive
Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994); or OMB review or any Agency
action under Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). The Agency
hereby certifies, under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), that this proposed action will not
have significant negative economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. A tolerance is one of the
regulatory requirements needed for use
of a pesticide and thus establishing a
tolerance is expected to have no adverse
economic impact. In addition, the
Agency has determined that this action
will not have a substantial direct effect
on States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Executive Order 13132 requires
EPA to develop an accountable process
to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies
that have federalism implications’’ is
defined in the Executive order to
include regulations that have
‘‘substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’ This proposed
rule directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers, and food
retailers, not States. This action does not
alter the relationships or distribution of
power and responsibilities established
by Congress in the preemption
provisions of section 408(n)(4) of the
FFDCA. For these same reasons, the
Agency has determined that this
proposed rule does not have any ‘‘tribal
implications’’ as described in Executive
Order 13175, entitled Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments (65 FR 67249, November
9, 2000). Executive Order 3175, requires
EPA to develop an accountable process
to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input
by tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal
ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Commodity
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Sep 30, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
implications’’ is defined in the
Executive order to include regulations
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and the Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.’’ This
proposed rule will not have substantial
direct effects on tribal governments, on
the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: September 19, 2008.
Donald R. Stubbs,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR
chapter I be amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.628 is amended by
revising paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
§ 180.628 Chlorantraniliprole; tolerances
for residues.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Indirect or inadvertent resisues.
Time-limited tolerances are established
for indirect or inadvertent residues of
the insecticide chlorantraniliprole (3bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5carboxamide) in or on the following
commodities. The tolerances will expire
and are revoked on the dates specified
in the following table.
Parts per million
Animal feed, nongrass, group 18 ........................................................................
Cowpea, forage ...................................................................................................
Cowpea, hay ........................................................................................................
Field pea, hay ......................................................................................................
Field pea, vine .....................................................................................................
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16 ..............................................
Grass, forage, fodder and hay, group 17 ............................................................
Leek .....................................................................................................................
Okra .....................................................................................................................
Onion, green ........................................................................................................
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57045
Expiration/revocation date
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.70
0.20
E:\FR\FM\01OCP1.SGM
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
01OCP1
57046
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 1, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Commodity
Parts per million
Onion, Welsh .......................................................................................................
Peanut, hay ..........................................................................................................
Shallot ..................................................................................................................
Soybean, forage ..................................................................................................
Soybean, hay .......................................................................................................
Strawberry ............................................................................................................
Sugarcane ............................................................................................................
Vegetable, leaves of root and tuber, group 2 .....................................................
Expiration/revocation date
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
1.20
0.20
0.20
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
4/25/10
[FR Doc. E8–22946 Filed 9–30–08; 8:45 am]
ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Sep 30, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01OCP1.SGM
01OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 1, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57040-57046]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22946]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0647; FRL-8382-4]
Chlorantraniliprole; Proposed Time-Limited Pesticide Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes to establish time-limited tolerances
for residues of chlorantraniliprole in or on cowpeas, forage and hay;
field peas, vines and hay; forage, fodder and straw of cereal grains,
crop group 16; grass forage, fodder and hay, crop group 17; leaves of
root and tuber vegetables, crop group 2, leeks, nongrass animal feeds
(forage, fodder, straw and hay), crop group 18; okra; onions, green;
onions, Welsh; peanuts, hay; shallots; soybeans, forage and hay;
strawberries and sugarcane, sugar under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). The tolerances expire on April 25, 2010.
[[Page 57041]]
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 1, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0647, 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 Facility'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.
Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2008-0647. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at https://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., 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 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 hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are 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: Kable Bo Davis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 306-0415; e-mail address: davis.kable@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. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
EPA on its own initiative, under section 408(e) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(e), is proposing to establish a tolerances for residues of the
insecticide chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-
[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-
carboxamide, in or on cowpeas, forage and hay at 0.20 parts per million
(ppm); field peas, vines and hay at 0.20 ppm; forage, fodder and straw
of cereal grains, crop group 16 at 0.20 ppm, grass forage, fodder and
hay, crop group 17 at 0.20 ppm; leaves of root and tuber vegetables,
crop group 2 at 0.20 ppm; leeks at 0.20 ppm; nongrass animal feeds
(forage, fodder, straw and hay), crop group 18 at 0.20 ppm; okra at
0.70 ppm; onions, green at 0.20 ppm; onions,
[[Page 57042]]
Welsh at 0.20 ppm; peanuts, hay at 0.20 ppm; shallots at 0.20 ppm;
soybeans, forage and hay at 0.20 ppm; strawberries at 1.2 ppm; and
sugarcane, sugar at 0.20 ppm.
Recently, EPA established tolerances for chlorantraniliprole on
apple, wet pomace; brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A; brassica,
leafy greens, subgroup 5B; cotton, gin byproduct; cotton, hulls; cotton
undelinted seed; fruit, pome, group 11; fruit, stone, group 12; grape;
grape, raisen; potato; vegetable, cucurbit, group 9; vegetable,
fruiting, group 8; vegetable, leafy, except brassica, group 4; milk;
meat; meat byproduct and fat. At that time EPA determined rotational
crop tolerances were required, and that the petitioner needed to
conduct extensive field rotational crop trials. The Agency concluded
that until the requested data are submitted, a restriction should be
imposed on labels prohibiting the rotation to any crop not on the
label. In response, the registrant submitted proposals for the
establishment of tolerances for inadvertent residues for a number of
crops pending submission of the requested data. After considering the
registrant's submission, EPA is now proposing time-limited tolerances
to address rotated crops.
EPA has decided to propose time-limited rotational crop tolerances
for chlorantraniliprole. Rotational crop trials (2003, 2004, 2005) were
conducted in Canada and the United States on leafy vegetables (Swiss
chard, lettuce, spinach), root vegetables (radish, beet, turnip),
cereal grains (wheat, oat) and soybean. Based on the data on
chlorantraniliprole, the Agency believes that the residue data would
not underestimate residues on rotated crops. Thus the Agency believes
that the 0.20 ppm tolerances on rotational crops are appropriate and
protective. EPA also determined that adding these proposed tolerances
would not change its prior safety finding for chlorantraniliprole.
EPA's updated risk assessment can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0647.
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that `` there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
. ''
EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the
regulatory requirements of section 408 of the FFDCA and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/
fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure, consistent with section
408(b)(2) of FFDCA, for a tolerance for residues of
chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-
[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-
carboxamide, in or on cowpeas, forage and hay at 0.20 ppm; field peas,
vines and hay at 0.20 ppm; forage, fodder and straw of cereal grains,
crop group 16 at 0.20 ppm, grass forage, fodder and hay, crop group 17
at 0.20 ppm; leaves of root and tuber vegetables, crop group 2 at 0.20
ppm; leeks at 0.20 ppm; nongrass animal feeds (forage, fodder, straw
and hay), crop group 18 at 0.20 ppm; okra at 0.70 ppm; onions, green at
0.20 ppm; onions, Welsh at 0.20 ppm; peanuts, hay at 0.20 ppm; shallots
at 0.20 ppm; soybeans, forage and hay at 0.20 ppm; strawberries at 1.20
ppm; and sugarcane, sugar at 0.20 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures
and risks associated with establishing the tolerance follows:
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
Chlorantraniliprole has no significant acute toxicity via the oral,
dermal, and inhalation routes of exposure. This substance is not an eye
or skin irritant and does not cause skin sensitization. In short-term
studies, the most consistent effects are those associated with non
adverse pharmacological response to the xenobiotic, induction of liver
enzymes and subsequent increase in liver weights. Chlorantraniliprole
is not genotoxic, neurotoxic, immunotoxic, carcinogenic, or
teratogenic. Furthermore, it is not uniquely toxic to the conceptus as
there were no maternal or fetal effects in studies conducted in rats
and rabbits. Based on the results of a 28-day dermal study in rats, as
well as the dermal LD50 study, chlorantraniliprole has
relatively low dermal toxicity.
Overall, chlorantraniliprole exhibits minimal mammalian toxicity
after long-term exposure. The only consistent observation in the
mammalian toxicology studies is an increased degree of
microvesiculation of the adrenal cortex after dermal or dietary
administration of chlorantraniliprole. Based on the lack of adverse
effect on the function of the adrenal gland, this observation was
considered treatment related, but not ``adverse.''In addition to the
adrenal effects, liver effects (e.g., increased liver weight and
induction of cytochrome P450 enzymes) were reported in the 90-day oral
subchronic studies across species and only at the highest dose tested
(HDT) >1,000 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day). While in the
subchronic studies, these effects were considered adaptive, the liver
effects were more pronounced in the 18-month chronic mouse study at the
HDT. Increased eosinophilic foci (preneoplastic foci) were noted in
male mice at 935 mg/kg/day and liver hypertrophy and weight increase
were evident at the next lower dose (158 mg/kg/day), but progression to
tumors was not apparent for these effects. Therefore, the eosinophilic
foci appear to be an adverse effect only seen in the HDT and was graded
minimal in severity.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
toxic effects caused by chlorantraniliprole 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. The referenced document is available in the docket
established by this action, which is described under ADDRESSES, and is
identified as EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0275 in that docket.
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable
[[Page 57043]]
risk, the toxicological level of concern (LOC) is derived from the
highest dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) in
the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use in risk
assessment. However, if a NOAEL cannot be determined, the lowest dose
at which adverse effects of concern are identified (the LOAEL) is
sometimes used for risk assessment. Uncertainty/safety factors (UFs)
are used in conjunction with the LOC to take into account uncertainties
inherent in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and
in the variations in sensitivity among members of the human population
as well as other unknowns. Safety is assessed for acute and chronic
risks by comparing aggregate exposure to the pesticide to the acute
population adjusted dose (aPAD) and chronic population adjusted dose
(cPAD). The aPAD and cPAD are calculated by dividing the LOC by all
applicable UFs. Short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term risks are
evaluated by comparing aggregate exposure to the LOC to ensure that the
margin of exposure (MOE) called for by the product of all applicable
UFs is not exceeded.
For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of
exposure will lead to some degree of risk and estimates risk in terms
of the probability of occurrence of additional adverse cases.
Generally, cancer risks are considered non-threshold. For more
information on the general principles EPA uses in risk characterization
and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for chlorantraniliprole
used for human risk assessment can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document Chlorantraniliprole (DPX-E2Y45): Human
Health Risk Assessment for Proposed Uses on pome fruit, stone fruit,
leafy vegetables, brassica leafy vegetables, cucurbit vegetables,
fruiting vegetables, cotton, grapes, potatoes, rice, turf and
ornamentals pages 22-24 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0275.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to chlorantraniliprole, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing chlorantraniliprole
tolerances in (40 CFR 180.628). EPA assessed dietary exposures from
chlorantraniliprole 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 chlorantraniliprole;
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 Agriculture (USDA) 1994-1996 and 1998 CSFII. As to
residue levels in food, EPA assumed all foods for which there are
tolerances were treated and contain tolerance-level residues.
The inclusion of additional livestock feeds such as forage, fodder
and straw from cowpea, field pea, soybean, cereal grains, nongrass
animal feeds or peanut does not increase the livestock dietary burdens
and thus the meat and milk tolerances. While the addition of
strawberries, sugarcane, leek, onions, shallot, and okra that are
considered human food results in a miniscule increase in exposure, a
DEEM analysis that incorporates all the new commodities does not change
the risk outcome which remains at 1% of the cPAD for the most highly
exposed population, children ages 1-2. In addition, the dietary
exposure from leeks, onions and shallots is negligible.
iii. Cancer. Because chlorantraniliprole has been classified as a
``not likely human carcinogen'', a quantitative exposure assessment
relative to cancer risk is not necessary.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency lacks
sufficient monitoring data to complete a comprehensive dietary exposure
analysis and risk assessment for chlorantraniliprole in drinking water.
Because the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data,
drinking water concentration estimates are made by reliance on
simulation or modeling taking into account data on the environmental
fate characteristics of chlorantraniliprole. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure
assessment can be found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/
index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) of
chlorantraniliprole for acute exposures are estimated to be 26.862
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 1.06 ppb for ground
water. The EECs for chronic exposures are estimated to be 3.650 ppb for
surface water and 1.06 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. Because no acute hazard,
attributable to a single dose, was identified; acute dietary risk was
not assessed. For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value 3.650 ppb was used to access the contribution to
drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
Chlorantraniliprole is registered for use on the following
residential non-dietary sites: Turfgrass and ornamental plants.
Although residential exposure could occur, due to the lack of toxicity
identified for short-term and intermediate-term durations via the
relevant routes of exposure, no risk is expected from these exposures.
Additional information on residential exposure assumptions can be
found at www.regulations.gov (Docket ID EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0275, pages 36
through 37).
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.''
Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative
risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to chlorantraniliprole and
any other substances and chlorantraniliprole does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that
chlorantraniliprole has a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see the policy statements
released by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs concerning common
mechanism determinations and procedures for cumulating effects from
substances
[[Page 57044]]
found to have a common mechanism on EPA's website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408 of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional (10X) tenfold margin of safety for infants and children
in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and exposure
unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of
safety will be safe for infants and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA safety factor. In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X when
reliable data do not support the choice of a different factor, or, if
reliable data are available, EPA uses a different additional FQPA
safety factor value based on the use of traditional UFs and/or special
FQPA safety factors, as appropriate.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There were no effects on
fetal growth or postnatal development up to the limit dose of 1,000 mg/
kg/day in rats or rabbits in the developmental or 2-generation
reproduction studies. Additionally, there were no treatment related
effects on the numbers of litters, fetuses (live or dead), resorptions,
sex ratio, or post-implantation loss and no effects on fetal body
weights, skeletal ossification, and external, visceral, or skeletal
malformations or variations.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show that it
would be safe for infants and children to reduce the FQPA safety factor
to 1X. That decision is based on the following findings:
i. The toxicology database for chlorantraniliprole is complete for
the purposes of this risk assessment and the characterization of
potential prenatal and postnatal risks to infants and children.
ii. No susceptibility was identified in the toxicological database,
and there are no residual uncertainties re: prenatal and/or postnatal
exposure.
iii. There are no treatment-related neurotoxic findings in the
acute and subchronic oral neurotoxicity studies in rats.
iv. The exposure assessment is protective: The dietary food
exposure assessment utilizes tolerance level residues and 100 percent
crop treated (PCT) information for all commodities. The submitted field
rotational crop studies do not match those recommended in the
guidelines. However, data from confined rotational crop studies and
field rotational crop studies show that uptake of chlorantraniliprole
is below the quantification level in roots and grains, and range of
0.01 to 0.15 ppm in tops of root vegetables and forage, fodder and
straw of cereal grains and soybean. The 0.20 ppm tolerances based on
the collective data should be conservative. Also, the tolerances on
rotational crops strawberry and okra are conservative since the
strawberry tolerance is based on residues in grape from direct
application of chlorantraniliprole and the okra tolerance is based on
residues resulting from direct treatment on tomato and pepper. An
exposure assessment using conservative residue values is expected to be
protective.
The drinking water assessment utilizes values generated by models
and associated modeling parameters which are designed to provide
conservative, health protective, high-end estimates of water
concentrations. By using these screening-level exposure assessments,
the chronic dietary (food and drinking water) risk is not
underestimated.
v. Although residential exposure is expected over the short- and
possibly intermediate-term (via the dermal and/or incidental oral
route), there is no hazard expected via these routes/durations, and
therefore no risk for these scenarios.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
Safety is assessed for acute and chronic risks by comparing
aggregate exposure to the pesticide to the aPAD and cPAD. The aPAD and
cPAD are calculated by dividing the LOC by all applicable UFs. For
linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the probability of additional
cancer cases given aggregate exposure. Short-term, intermediate-term,
and long-term risks are evaluated by comparing aggregate exposure to
the LOC to ensure that the MOE called for by the product of all
applicable UFs is not exceeded.
1. Acute risk. No acute risk is expected because no acute hazard,
attributable to a single dose, was identified.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to
chlorantraniliprole from food and water will utilize <1% of the cPAD
for the population group children 1-2 years (the highest exposed
subpopulation). Based the use pattern, chronic residential exposure to
residues of chlorantraniliprole is not expected.
3. Short-term/intermediate risk. Short-term aggregate and
intermediate-term exposure takes into account residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background
exposure level).
There is potential for short-term and intermediate-term post-
application dermal (adults and children) and incidental oral (children
only) exposure to chlorantraniliprole. However, due to the lack of
toxicity via dermal route, as well as the lack of toxicity over the
acute, short-term and intermediate-term via the oral route - no risk is
expected from these exposures. Inhalation exposure is not expected due
to the low vapor pressure of chlorantraniliprole (so applied/deposited
residues are not expected to volatilize into the air).
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Chlorantraniliprole
has been classified as a ``not likely human carcinogen.'' It is not
expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to chlorantraniliprole residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology liquid chromatography/mass
spectrometry (LC/MS) 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.
B. International Residue Limits
There are no international residue limits that affect the Agency's
recommendations at this time. There are no CODEX or Mexican maximum
residue limits (MRLs) for chlorantraniliprole that exists at this time.
C. Conditions
Tolerances may be made permanent following submission of rotational
crop residue data suitable for establishing tolerances.
V. Conclusion
Time-limited tolerances are proposed for residues of
chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-
[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-
carboxamide, in or on cowpea, forage and hay at 0.20 ppm; field pea,
vines and hay at 0.20 ppm; forage, fodder and straw of cereal grains,
crop group 16 at 0.20 ppm, grass forage, fodder and hay,
[[Page 57045]]
crop group 17 at 0.20 ppm; leaves of root and tuber vegetables, crop
group 2 at 0.20 ppm; leek at 0.20 ppm; nongrass animal feeds (forage,
fodder, straw and hay), crop group 18 at 0.20 ppm; okra at 0.70 ppm;
onion, green at 0.20 ppm; onion, Welsh at 0.20 ppm; peanut, hay at 0.20
ppm; shallot at 0.20 ppm; soybean, forage and hay at 0.20 ppm;
strawberries at 1.20 ppm; and sugarcane, sugar at 0.20 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This proposed 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 proposed rule has
been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack
of significance, this proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order
13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).
This proposed rule does not contain any information collections subject
to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate
as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). Nor does it require any special
considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or OMB review or any
Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any technical standards
that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus
standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d)
(15 U.S.C. 272 note). The Agency hereby certifies, under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), that this proposed action
will not have significant negative economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. A tolerance is one of the regulatory
requirements needed for use of a pesticide and thus establishing a
tolerance is expected to have no adverse economic impact. In addition,
the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial
direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' This proposed rule directly regulates growers, food
processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States. This action
does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of the FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency
has determined that this proposed rule does not have any ``tribal
implications'' as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000). Executive Order 3175, requires EPA to develop
an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by
tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal implications'' is
defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have
``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.'' This proposed rule will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: September 19, 2008.
Donald R. Stubbs,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter I be amended as
follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.628 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 180.628 Chlorantraniliprole; tolerances for residues.
* * * * *
(d) Indirect or inadvertent resisues. Time-limited tolerances are
established for indirect or inadvertent residues of the insecticide
chlorantraniliprole (3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-
[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-
carboxamide) in or on the following commodities. The tolerances will
expire and are revoked on the dates specified in the following table.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million Expiration/revocation date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Animal feed, nongrass, group 18.................... 0.20 4/25/10
Cowpea, forage..................................... 0.20 4/25/10
Cowpea, hay........................................ 0.20 4/25/10
Field pea, hay..................................... 0.20 4/25/10
Field pea, vine.................................... 0.20 4/25/10
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16.. 0.20 4/25/10
Grass, forage, fodder and hay, group 17............ 0.20 4/25/10
Leek............................................... 0.20 4/25/10
Okra............................................... 0.70 4/25/10
Onion, green....................................... 0.20 4/25/10
[[Page 57046]]
Onion, Welsh....................................... 0.20 4/25/10
Peanut, hay........................................ 0.20 4/25/10
Shallot............................................ 0.20 4/25/10
Soybean, forage.................................... 0.20 4/25/10
Soybean, hay....................................... 0.20 4/25/10
Strawberry......................................... 1.20 4/25/10
Sugarcane.......................................... 0.20 4/25/10
Vegetable, leaves of root and tuber, group 2....... 0.20 4/25/10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E8-22946 Filed 9-30-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S