Cyprosulfamide; Pesticide Tolerances, 60969-60974 [E8-24034]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Commodity
Parts per million
Cattle, meat ....................
Cattle, meat byproducts
Goat, meat ......................
Goat, meat byproducts ...
Horse, meat ....................
Horse, meat byproducts
Milk .................................
Sheep, meat ...................
Sheep, meat byproducts
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues.
Tolerances are established for indirect
or inadvertent combined residues of
thiencarbazone-methyl and its
metabolite BYH 18636-MMT-glucoside
[2-hexopyranosyl-5-methoxy-4-methyl2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one],
calculated as the parent compound, in
or on the following food commodities:
Commodity
Parts per million
Soybean, forage .............
Soybean, hay ..................
0.04
0.15
[FR Doc. E8–24040 Filed 10–14–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0042; FRL–8377–4]
Cyprosulfamide; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
erowe on PROD1PC64 with RULES
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of the herbicide
safener cyprosulfamide in or on corn,
field, forage; corn, field, grain; corn,
field, stover; corn, pop, grain; corn, pop,
stover; corn, sweet, forage; corn, sweet,
kernel plus cob with husks removed;
and corn, sweet, stover; and for
combined residues of cyprosulfamide
and its metabolite 4-(aminosulfonyl)-Ncyclopropylbenzamide, calculated as
cyprosulfamide, in or on cattle, meat
byproducts; goat, meat byproducts;
horse, meat byproducts and sheep, meat
byproducts. Bayer CropScience
requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
This regulation is effective
October 15, 2008. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before December 15, 2008, and
must be filed in accordance with the
DATES:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Oct 14, 2008
Jkt 214001
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–2008–0042. To access the
electronic docket, go to https://
www.regulations.gov, select ‘‘Advanced
Search,’’ then ‘‘Docket Search.’’ Insert
the docket ID number where indicated
and select the ‘‘Submit’’ button. Follow
the instructions on the regulations.gov
website to view the docket index or
access available documents. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the docket index available in
regulations.gov. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available in the electronic docket at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S–
4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket
Facility telephone number is (703) 305–
5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Stanton, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–5218; e-mail address:
stanton.susan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to those engaged in the
following activities:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
60969
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies
of this Document?
In addition to accessing an electronic
copy of this Federal Register document
through the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may access
this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may
also access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s pilot
e-CFR site at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/
ecfr.
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing
Request?
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, any
person may file an objection to any
aspect of this regulation and may also
request a hearing on those objections.
You must file your objection or request
a hearing on this regulation in
accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2008–0042 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
requests must be in writing, and must be
mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk
as required by 40 CFR part 178 on or
before December 15, 2008.
In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please
submit a copy of the filing that does not
contain any CBI for inclusion in the
public docket that is described in
ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2
may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit this copy,
identified by docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPP–2008–0042, 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.
E:\FR\FM\15OCR1.SGM
15OCR1
60970
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on PROD1PC64 with RULES
• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket’s
normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to
4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket Facility telephone number is
(703) 305–5805.
II. Petition for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of June 13,
2008 (73 FR 33814) (FRL–8367–3), EPA
issued a notice pursuant to section
408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 7E7206) by Bayer
CropScience, 2 TW Alexander Drive,
P.O. Box 12014, Research Triangle Park,
NC 27709. The petition requested that
40 CFR part 180 be amended by adding
a section for the herbicide safener
cyprosulfamide and establishing
tolerances therein for residues of
cyprosulfamide (parent) in or on the raw
agricultural commodities field corn
grain at 0.01 parts per million (ppm);
sweet corn kernels at 0.01 ppm; sweet
corn (k+cwhr) at 0.01 ppm; pop corn
grain at 0.01 ppm; milk at 0.01ppm;
cattle, meat at 0.01 ppm; cattle, fat at
0.01 ppm; cattle, liver at 0.02 ppm;
cattle, kidney at 0.05 ppm; goat, meat at
0.01 ppm; goat, fat at 0.01 ppm; goat,
liver at 0.02 ppm; goat, kidney at 0.05
ppm; hog, meat at 0.01 ppm; hog, fat at
0.01 ppm; hog, liver at 0.02 ppm; hog,
kidney at 0.05 ppm; horse, meat at 0.01
ppm; horse, fat at 0.01 ppm; horse, liver
at 0.02 ppm; horse, kidney at 0.05 ppm;
sheep, meat at 0.01 ppm; sheep, fat at
0.01 ppm; sheep, liver at 0.02 ppm; and
sheep, kidney at 0.05 ppm; and for
residues of parent cyprosulfamide and
its metabolites AE 0001789sulfonamide-alanine, AE 0001789sulfonamide-lactate, and AE 0001789-Ncyclopropyl-4-sulfamoylbenzamide in
or on the raw agricultural commodity
field corn forage at 0.15 ppm, sweet
corn forage at 0.40 ppm, field corn
stover at 0.60 ppm, sweet corn stover at
0.60 ppm, and pop corn stover at 0.60
ppm. That notice referenced a summary
of the petition prepared by Bayer
CropScience, the registrant, which is
available to the public in the docket,
https://www.regulations.gov. There were
no comments received in response to
the notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the metabolites to be included
in the tolerance expression for livestock,
corn forage and corn stover
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Oct 14, 2008
Jkt 214001
commodities; modified tolerance levels
for corn stover commodities and field
corn forage; and revised the livestock
commodities for which tolerances are
needed as well as the livestock
commodity tolerance levels. The
reasons for these changes are explained
in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue....’’
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, and the factors specified in
section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for the petitioned-for
tolerances for residues of the herbicide
safener cyprosulfamide in or on corn,
field, forage at 0.20 ppm; corn, field,
grain at 0.01 ppm; corn, field, stover at
0.20 ppm; corn, pop, grain at 0.01 ppm;
corn, pop, stover at 0.20 ppm; corn,
sweet, forage at 0.40 ppm; corn, sweet,
kernel plus cob with husks removed at
0.01 ppm; and corn, sweet, stover at
0.35 ppm; and for combined residues of
cyprosulfamide and its metabolite 4(aminosulfonyl)-Ncyclopropylbenzamide, calculated as
cyprosulfamide, in or on cattle, meat
byproducts at 0.02 ppm; goat, meat
byproducts at 0.02 ppm; horse, meat
byproducts at 0.02 ppm; and sheep,
meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm. EPA’s
assessment of exposures and risks
associated with establishing tolerances
follows.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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.
Cyprosulfamide has low toxicity in
acute toxicity and irritation studies and
is not a skin sensitizer. In subchronic
and chronic oral toxicity studies, the
critical target organ for cyprosulfamide
is the urinary tract including the kidney,
bladder and ureters. Toxic effects in
these organs include inflammation and
irritation resulting from the formation of
calculi caused by deposition of the
parent compound at high doses.
In the rat chronic toxicity/
carcinogenicity study, at doses
associated with mortality due to
nephropathy, there were treatmentrelated transitional cell carcinomas in
the kidney of one male and a
transitional cell carcinoma in the
urinary bladder of one female. In mice,
at a dose where there was formation of
calculi in the urothelial system,
cyprosulfamide was associated with two
incidents of transitional cell papilloma
in the urinary bladder. Since the
neoplasms occurred only at high doses
that also demonstrated calculi
formation, cyprosulfamide was
classified as ‘‘Not likely to be a
Carcinogen to Humans at doses that do
not cause urothelial cytotoxicity.’’ None
of the battery of mutagenicity or genetic
toxicity studies indicated a positive
result for cyprosulfamide.
There is no evidence of
developmental toxicity in the prenatal
developmental toxicity studies in the rat
and rabbit and no evidence of increased
qualitative or quantitative susceptibility
of fetuses in these studies or of offspring
in the 2–generation reproduction study
in rats. Specific neurotoxicity was not
identified in the rat, mouse or dog
subchronic or chronic studies or in the
rat acute and subchronic neurotoxicity
screen studies.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by cyprosulfamide as
well as the no-observed-adverse-effectlevel (NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in the document
Cyprosulfamide: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Uses on Corn
(Field, Sweet, and Pop), Sorghum (Seed
Treatment), Residential Turf and
E:\FR\FM\15OCR1.SGM
15OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Ornamentals, page 55 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0042.
erowe on PROD1PC64 with RULES
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold
below which there is no appreciable
risk, a toxicological point of departure
(POD) is identified as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk
assessment. The POD may be defined as
the NOAEL in the toxicology study
identified as appropriate for use in risk
assessment. However, if a NOAEL
cannot be determined, the LOAEL or a
Benchmark Dose (BMD) approach is
sometimes used for risk assessment.
Uncertainty/safety factors (UFs) are
used in conjunction with the POD to
take into account uncertainties inherent
in the extrapolation from laboratory
animal data to humans and in the
variations in sensitivity among members
of the human population as well as
other unknowns. Safety is assessed for
acute and chronic dietary risks by
comparing aggregate food and water
exposure to the pesticide to the acute
population adjusted dose (aPAD) and
chronic population adjusted dose
(cPAD). The aPAD and cPAD are
calculated by dividing the POD by all
applicable UFs. Aggregate short-term,
intermediate-term, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing food,
water, and residential exposure to the
POD to ensure that the margin of
exposure (MOE) called for by the
product of all applicable UFs is not
exceeded. This latter value is referred to
as the Level of Concern (LOC).
For non-threshold risks, the Agency
assumes that any amount of exposure
will lead to some degree of risk. Thus,
the Agency estimates risk in terms of the
probability of an occurrence of the
adverse effect greater than that expected
in a lifetime. For more information on
the general principles EPA uses in risk
characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment
process, see https://www.epa.gov/
pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for cyprosulfamide used for
human risk assessment can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov in the
document Cyprosulfamide: Human
Health Risk Assessment for Proposed
Uses on Corn (Field, Sweet, and Pop),
Sorghum (Seed Treatment), Residential
Turf and Ornamentals in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0042.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to cyprosulfamide, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances. No other
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Oct 14, 2008
Jkt 214001
tolerances have been established for
cyprosulfamide. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from cyprosulfamide 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 cyprosulfamide; 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 Continuing Surveys of Food
Intakes by Individuals (CSFII). As to
residue levels in food, EPA assumed
that 100% of crops with requested uses
of cyprosulfamide are treated and that
all treated crops contain residues at the
tolerance level.
iii. Cancer. Based on the results of
carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice,
EPA classified cyprosulfamide as ‘‘Not
likely to be a Carcinogen to Humans at
doses that do not cause urothelial
cytotoxicity ’’; therefore, a cancer
exposure assessment is unnecessary for
this chemical.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did
not use anticipated residue or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for cyprosulfamide. Tolerance level
residues and 100 PCT were assumed for
all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for cyprosulfamide in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
cyprosulfamide. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir
Screening Tool (FIRST) and Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCIGROW) models, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of
cyprosulfamide for chronic exposures
for non-cancer assessments are
estimated to be 2.4 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 0.14 ppb for
ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
60971
water concentration of value 2.4 ppb
was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
Cyprosulfamide is proposed for
registration on the following use sites
that could result in residential
exposures: Residential turfgrass,
ornamentals and recreational sites. EPA
assessed residential exposure using the
following assumptions: Homeowners
who apply cyprosulfamide to
ornamentals and turfgrass may be
exposed for short-term durations via the
dermal and inhalation routes. Shortterm dermal and inhalation exposures
were assessed for residential handlers
who mix, load and apply liquid
cyprosulfamide products using lowpressure hand wands and garden hoseend sprayers.
There is also potential for short-term
postapplication dermal exposure of
adults and children and incidental oral
exposure of children following
application of cyprosulfamide to turf
(e.g. home lawns). EPA assessed adult
and toddler postapplication dermal
exposures as well as incidental oral
exposure of toddlers from hand-tomouth, object-to-mouth and incidental
soil ingestion activities.
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.’’
Although cyprosulfamide has in
common with other sulfonamide
chemicals the ability to cause urinary
tract calculi and in some cases tumors
in the urinary tract at high doses, EPA
has not made a common mechanism
finding for cyprosulfamide such that
cumulative risk assessment based on
chemicals with a common mechanism is
necessary for cyprosulfamide and other
sulfonamides. With cyprosulfamide, the
formation of calculi in the urinary tract
results from the precipitation of
cyprosulfamide once it reaches
saturation in the animal’s system.
Precipitation of cyprosulfamide is a
physical/chemical process and not a
mechanism of toxicity. Exposures to
cyprosulfamide and other sulfonamides,
such as thiencarbazone-methyl, are not
E:\FR\FM\15OCR1.SGM
15OCR1
60972
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on PROD1PC64 with RULES
additive with regard to the formation of
urinary tract calculi at anticipated
exposure levels. At higher doses, each
sulfonamide will form calculi
independently of the other by a separate
physical/chemical process. At lower
doses, near the anticipated exposure
levels, calculi will not form even if there
is exposure to multiple sulfonamides
because sulfonamides will not influence
the formation of precipitates by each
other. It would be appropriate to add
exposures in assessing precipitate
formation only if the sulfonamides
interacted somehow during crystal
formation. 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
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(b)(2)(c) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA safety factor (SF). In applying this
provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
The prenatal and postnatal toxicity
database for cyprosulfamide includes rat
and rabbit developmental toxicity
studies and a 2–generation reproduction
toxicity study in rats. There was no
evidence of increased susceptibility of
in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or of young rats
in the 2–generation reproduction study.
No fetal effects were seen in the rat
developmental toxicity study at doses
that produced maternal toxicity (weight
gain effects and indications of kidney
effects in one animal). There are two
rabbit developmental studies available
for cyprosulfamide. A second study was
conducted due to excess maternal
toxicity (including deaths) in the first
study. As in the rat study, no fetal
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Oct 14, 2008
Jkt 214001
effects were seen in either rabbit study
at doses that resulted in maternal
toxicity (body weight decrease, reduced
food consumption, and kidney effects in
both studies; as well as deaths in the
first study).
In the rat reproduction study, effects
in the pups occurred at doses that also
resulted in maternal toxicity. Mid-dose
effects included organ weight changes
in the spleen and urinary tract in the
dams and body weight changes in the
pups. At the high dose, there was
mortality among the dams associated
with poor physical condition and severe
renal lesion; effects in pups at the high
dose included decreased pup weight,
delayed vaginal opening (apparently
related to the decreased pup weight),
reduced viability (3 total litter loss in
the F1 generation), reduced lactation
index and clinical findings (paleness,
cold to touch, missing milk spot and
thin appearance). No increase in
sensitivity of the pups was indicated.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for
cyprosulfamide is complete, except for
immunotoxicity studies. EPA began
requiring functional immunotoxicity
testing of all food and non-food use
pesticides on December 26, 2007. Since
the requirement went into effect well
after this tolerance petition was
submitted, these studies are not yet
available for cyprosulfamide. In the
absence of specific immunotoxicity
studies, EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data for cyprosulfamide and
determined that an additional database
uncertainty factor is not needed to
account for potential immunotoxicity.
EPA’s determination is based on the
following considerations.
a. There was some indication of
possible immunotoxicity in the form of
increased severity of lymphocytolysis in
the subchronic mouse study in females,
but only at a high dose of about 1,300
mg/kg/day. Although minimal
lymphocytolysis was seen in the control
animals, lymphocytolysis to a slightly
greater degree was observed in some of
the high dose animals. This minor
difference in severity is not of concern
because:
(1) The marginal change in severity
between control and dosed animals was
only noted at a very high dose and may
not constitute an adverse effect.
(2) No similar effect was seen in the
carcinogenicity study in the mouse at
about 600 mg/kg/day or in other species.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
b. EPA considered the entire toxicity
database for cyprosulfamide for
potential adverse effects on the thymus
and spleen as indications of potential
immunotoxicity. Although changes in
thymus weight and shape and brown
pigment in the spleen were noted, these
were determined to be non-specific
changes not indicative of
immunotoxicity.
c. Cyprosulfamide does not belong to
a class of chemicals that would be
expected to be immunotoxic.
Therefore, based the considerations in
this Unit, EPA does not believe that
conducting immunotoxicity testing will
result in a NOAEL less than the NOAEL
of 39 mg/kg/day already established for
cyprosulfamide, and an additional
factor (UFDB) for database uncertainties
is not needed to account for potential
immunotoxicity.
ii. There is no indication that
cyprosulfamide is a neurotoxic chemical
and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
cyprosulfamide results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the 2–generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed assuming 100 PCT and
tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to
cyprosulfamide in drinking water. EPA
used similarly conservative assumptions
to assess postapplication exposure of
children as well as incidental oral
exposure of toddlers. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by cyprosulfamide.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic pesticide exposures are safe by
comparing aggregate exposure estimates
to the aPAD and cPAD. The aPAD and
cPAD represent the highest safe
exposures, taking into account all
appropriate SFs. EPA calculates the
aPAD and cPAD by dividing the POD by
all applicable UFs. For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the probability of
additional cancer cases given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Shortterm, intermediate-term, and chronicterm risks are evaluated by comparing
the estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the POD to
ensure that the MOE called for by the
E:\FR\FM\15OCR1.SGM
15OCR1
erowe on PROD1PC64 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
product of all applicable UFs is not
exceeded.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account exposure
estimates from acute dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified in
the toxicology studies for
cyprosulfamide and no acute dietary
endpoint was selected. Therefore,
cyprosulfamide is not expected to pose
an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to cyprosulfamide
from food and water will utilize less
than 1% of the cPAD for the U.S.
population and all population
subgroups, including infants and
children. Based on the explanation in
Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of cyprosulfamide is not
expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure through food and
water (considered to be a background
exposure level).
Cyprosulfamide is currently registered
for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency
has determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with short-term residential
exposures to cyprosulfamide. Using the
exposure assumptions described in this
unit for short-term exposures, EPA has
concluded the combined short-term
food, water, and residential exposures
aggregated result in aggregate MOEs of
6,900 for adults and 5,300 for children
(toddlers). The aggregate MOE for adults
is based on the residential turf scenario
and includes combined food, drinking
water, dermal and inhalation exposures
for residential handlers as well as postapplication dermal exposures from
activities on treated turf. The aggregate
MOE for children includes food,
drinking water and post-application
dermal and incidental oral exposures
(hand-to-mouth, object-to-mouth and
soil ingestion) from activities on turf
areas previously treated with
cyprosulfamide.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure through food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Cyprosulfamide is not
registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Therefore, the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Oct 14, 2008
Jkt 214001
intermediate-term aggregate risk is the
sum of the risk from exposure to
cyprosulfamide through food and water,
which has already been addressed, and
will not be greater than the chronic
aggregate risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. EPA classified
cyprosulfamide as ‘‘Not likely to be a
Carcinogen to Humans at doses that do
not cause urothelial cytotoxicity. ’’
Cyprosulfamide is not expected to pose
a cancer risk.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to
cyprosulfamide residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
is available to enforce the tolerance
expression in plants (High Pressure
Liquid Chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry/Mass Spectromety (HPLC/
MS/MS) Method UB–008–P06–01) and
livestock commodities (HPLC/MS/MS
Method UB–008–P06–01/02). 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 Codex, Canadian or
Mexican maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established for residues of
cyprosulfamide in crop or livestock
commodities. However, the U.S. is
working with Canada and the United
Kingdom to achieve MRL harmonization
for corn grain.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the metabolites to be included
in the tolerance expression for livestock,
corn forage and corn stover
commodities; modified tolerance levels
for corn stover commodities and field
corn forage; and revised the livestock
commodities for which tolerances are
needed as well as the livestock
commodity tolerance levels.
The petitioner proposed tolerances for
residues of cyprosulfamide and three
metabolites (AE 0001789-sulfonamidealanine, AE 0001789-sulfonamidelactate, and AE 0001789-N-cyclopropyl4-sulfamoylbenzamide) on corn forage
and stover commodities as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
60973
Field corn forage at 0.15 ppm; field corn
stover at 0.60 ppm; pop corn stover at
0.60 ppm; sweet corn forage at 0.40
ppm; and sweet corn stover at 0.60 ppm.
Based on limited toxicity data for AE
0001789-N-cyclopropyl-4sulfamoylbenzamide, this metabolite
cannot be excluded as a residue of
concern based on hazard considerations.
The other two metabolites (AE 0001789sulfonamide-alanine, AE 0001789sulfonamide-lactate) are expected to be
less toxic than the parent compound
based on structure activity relationship
(SAR) analysis and can thus be
excluded as residues of concern based
on hazard considerations. In corn field
trials, residues of all four compounds
were low (most below the limit of
quantitation of 0.01 ppm), with parent
cyprosulfamide levels being the highest
of the four. Based on the lack of hazard
concern for two of the metabolites and
the low levels of all three, EPA
concluded that parent cyprosulfamide is
the residue of concern to be included in
the tolerance expression for corn
commodities, including forage and
stover. The results of the field trials
support tolerances for residues of
cyprosulfamide, per se, of 0.20 ppm in/
on field corn forage and stover; 0.20
ppm in/on popcorn stover; 0.40 ppm in/
on sweet corn forage; and 0.35 ppm in/
on sweet corn stover.
The petitioner proposed tolerances for
residues of cyprosulfamide, per se, on
meat (0.01 ppm), fat (0.01 ppm), liver
(0.02 ppm) and kidney (0.05 ppm) of
cattle, goat, hog, horse and sheep; and
milk (0.01 ppm). As noted in this Unit,
EPA concluded that the metabolite AE
0001789-N-cyclopropyl-4sulfamoylbenzamide (4(aminosulfonyl)-Ncyclopropylbenzamide) cannot be
excluded as a residue of concern based
on hazard considerations. The data from
the submitted cattle feeding study
indicate that no quantifiable residues of
cyprosulfamide or this metabolite are
expected in milk, meat or fat. However,
quantifiable residues of cyprosulfamide
and its metabolite may occur in meat
byproducts (kidney and liver) of cattle,
goat, horse and sheep. Based on the
calculated dietary burden of swine,
there is no reasonable expectation of
residues of cyprosulfamide or its
metabolite in swine (hog) commodities.
Therefore, EPA determined that
tolerances are needed only for residues
of cyprosulfamide and its metabolite (4(aminosulfonyl)-Ncyclopropylbenzamide) in/on the meat
byproducts of cattle, goat, horse and
sheep. The submitted data and
calculated dietary burden for ruminants
E:\FR\FM\15OCR1.SGM
15OCR1
60974
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 15, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
indicate that a tolerance level of 0.02
ppm in these commodities is
appropriate.
erowe on PROD1PC64 with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of the herbicide safener
cyprosulfamide (N-[[4[(cyclopropylamino)carbonyl]
phenyl]sulfonyl]-2-methoxybenzamide)
in or on corn, field, forage at 0.20 ppm;
corn, field, grain at 0.01 ppm; corn,
field, stover at 0.20 ppm; corn, pop,
grain at 0.01 ppm; corn, pop, stover at
0.20 ppm; corn, sweet, forage at 0.40
ppm; corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with
husks removed at 0.01 ppm; and corn,
sweet, stover at 0.35 ppm; and for
combined residues of cyprosulfamide
and its metabolite, 4-(aminosulfonyl)-Ncyclopropylbenzamide, calculated as
cyprosulfamide, in or on cattle, meat
byproducts at 0.02 ppm; goat, meat
byproducts at 0.02 ppm; horse, meat
byproducts at 0.02 ppm; and sheep,
meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances
under section 408(d) of FFDCA in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory
Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this final rule
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB
approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., nor does it require any special
considerations under Executive Order
12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:16 Oct 14, 2008
Jkt 217001
and food retailers, not States or tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this final rule. In addition, this final
rule does not impose any enforceable
duty or contain any unfunded mandate
as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (Public Law 104–4).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report to each House of
the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. This final rule is not
a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
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 180.644 is added to read as
follows:
■
§ 180.644 Cyprosulfamide; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are
established for residues of the herbicide
safener cyprosulfamide, N-[[4[(cyclopropylamino)carbonyl]
phenyl]sulfonyl]-2-methoxybenzamide,
in or on the following raw agricultural
commodities:
Commodity
Parts per million
Corn, field, forage ...........
Corn, field, grain .............
Corn, field, stover ...........
Corn, pop, grain ..............
Corn, pop, stover ............
Corn, sweet, forage ........
Corn, sweet, kernel plus
cob with husks removed .........................
Corn, sweet, stover ........
0.20
0.01
0.20
0.01
0.20
0.40
0.01
0.35
(2) Tolerances are established for
residues of the herbicide safener
cyprosulfamide, N-[[4[(cyclopropylamino)carbonyl]
phenyl]sulfonyl]-2-methoxybenzamide,
and its metabolite 4-(aminosulfonyl)-Ncyclopropylbenzamide, calculated as
cyprosulfamide, in or on the following
raw agricultural commodities:
Commodity
Parts per million
Cattle, meat byproducts
Goat, meat byproducts ...
Horse, meat byproducts
Sheep, meat byproducts
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertant residues.
[Reserved]
[FR Doc. E8–24034 Filed 10–14–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
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 29, 2008.
Debra Edwards,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[DA 08–2148; MB Docket No. 08–133; RM–
11465]
Television Broadcasting Services;
Greenville, NC
Federal Communications
Commission.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\15OCR1.SGM
15OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 15, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60969-60974]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24034]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0042; FRL-8377-4]
Cyprosulfamide; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of the
herbicide safener cyprosulfamide in or on corn, field, forage; corn,
field, grain; corn, field, stover; corn, pop, grain; corn, pop, stover;
corn, sweet, forage; corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed;
and corn, sweet, stover; and for combined residues of cyprosulfamide
and its metabolite 4-(aminosulfonyl)-N-cyclopropylbenzamide, calculated
as cyprosulfamide, in or on cattle, meat byproducts; goat, meat
byproducts; horse, meat byproducts and sheep, meat byproducts. Bayer
CropScience requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective October 15, 2008. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before December 15, 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-2008-0042. To access the
electronic docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, select ``Advanced
Search,'' then ``Docket Search.'' Insert the docket ID number where
indicated and select the ``Submit'' button. Follow the instructions on
the regulations.gov website to view the docket index or access
available documents. All documents in the docket are listed in the
docket index available in regulations.gov. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available in the electronic docket at https://www.regulations.gov, or,
if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in
Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr.,
Arlington, VA. The Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility
telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Stanton, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-5218; e-mail address: stanton.susan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those
engaged in the following activities:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to
provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by
this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in
determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document?
In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this Federal
Register document through the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may also access a
frequently updated electronic version of EPA's tolerance regulations at
40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR
site at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, any person may file an objection to
any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this
regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0042 in the subject line on the first page of
your submission. All requests must be in writing, and must be mailed or
delivered to the Hearing Clerk as required by 40 CFR part 178 on or
before December 15, 2008.
In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit this copy, identified by docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0042, 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.
[[Page 60970]]
Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
II. Petition for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of June 13, 2008 (73 FR 33814) (FRL-8367-
3), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
7E7206) by Bayer CropScience, 2 TW Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12014,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition requested that 40 CFR
part 180 be amended by adding a section for the herbicide safener
cyprosulfamide and establishing tolerances therein for residues of
cyprosulfamide (parent) in or on the raw agricultural commodities field
corn grain at 0.01 parts per million (ppm); sweet corn kernels at 0.01
ppm; sweet corn (k+cwhr) at 0.01 ppm; pop corn grain at 0.01 ppm; milk
at 0.01ppm; cattle, meat at 0.01 ppm; cattle, fat at 0.01 ppm; cattle,
liver at 0.02 ppm; cattle, kidney at 0.05 ppm; goat, meat at 0.01 ppm;
goat, fat at 0.01 ppm; goat, liver at 0.02 ppm; goat, kidney at 0.05
ppm; hog, meat at 0.01 ppm; hog, fat at 0.01 ppm; hog, liver at 0.02
ppm; hog, kidney at 0.05 ppm; horse, meat at 0.01 ppm; horse, fat at
0.01 ppm; horse, liver at 0.02 ppm; horse, kidney at 0.05 ppm; sheep,
meat at 0.01 ppm; sheep, fat at 0.01 ppm; sheep, liver at 0.02 ppm; and
sheep, kidney at 0.05 ppm; and for residues of parent cyprosulfamide
and its metabolites AE 0001789-sulfonamide-alanine, AE 0001789-
sulfonamide-lactate, and AE 0001789-N-cyclopropyl-4-sulfamoylbenzamide
in or on the raw agricultural commodity field corn forage at 0.15 ppm,
sweet corn forage at 0.40 ppm, field corn stover at 0.60 ppm, sweet
corn stover at 0.60 ppm, and pop corn stover at 0.60 ppm. That notice
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Bayer CropScience, the
registrant, which is available to the public in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the metabolites to be included in the tolerance expression for
livestock, corn forage and corn stover commodities; modified tolerance
levels for corn stover commodities and field corn forage; and revised
the livestock commodities for which tolerances are needed as well as
the livestock commodity tolerance levels. The reasons for these changes
are explained in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue....''
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure for the petitioned-for
tolerances for residues of the herbicide safener cyprosulfamide in or
on corn, field, forage at 0.20 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.01 ppm;
corn, field, stover at 0.20 ppm; corn, pop, grain at 0.01 ppm; corn,
pop, stover at 0.20 ppm; corn, sweet, forage at 0.40 ppm; corn, sweet,
kernel plus cob with husks removed at 0.01 ppm; and corn, sweet, stover
at 0.35 ppm; and for combined residues of cyprosulfamide and its
metabolite 4-(aminosulfonyl)-N-cyclopropylbenzamide, calculated as
cyprosulfamide, in or on cattle, meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm; goat,
meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm; horse, meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm; and
sheep, meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and
risks associated with establishing tolerances follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
Cyprosulfamide has low toxicity in acute toxicity and irritation
studies and is not a skin sensitizer. In subchronic and chronic oral
toxicity studies, the critical target organ for cyprosulfamide is the
urinary tract including the kidney, bladder and ureters. Toxic effects
in these organs include inflammation and irritation resulting from the
formation of calculi caused by deposition of the parent compound at
high doses.
In the rat chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study, at doses
associated with mortality due to nephropathy, there were treatment-
related transitional cell carcinomas in the kidney of one male and a
transitional cell carcinoma in the urinary bladder of one female. In
mice, at a dose where there was formation of calculi in the urothelial
system, cyprosulfamide was associated with two incidents of
transitional cell papilloma in the urinary bladder. Since the neoplasms
occurred only at high doses that also demonstrated calculi formation,
cyprosulfamide was classified as ``Not likely to be a Carcinogen to
Humans at doses that do not cause urothelial cytotoxicity.'' None of
the battery of mutagenicity or genetic toxicity studies indicated a
positive result for cyprosulfamide.
There is no evidence of developmental toxicity in the prenatal
developmental toxicity studies in the rat and rabbit and no evidence of
increased qualitative or quantitative susceptibility of fetuses in
these studies or of offspring in the 2-generation reproduction study in
rats. Specific neurotoxicity was not identified in the rat, mouse or
dog subchronic or chronic studies or in the rat acute and subchronic
neurotoxicity screen studies.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by cyprosulfamide as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in the document Cyprosulfamide: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Uses on Corn (Field, Sweet, and Pop), Sorghum
(Seed Treatment), Residential Turf and
[[Page 60971]]
Ornamentals, page 55 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0042.
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, a toxicological point of departure (POD) is
identified as the basis for derivation of reference values for risk
assessment. The POD may be defined as the NOAEL in the toxicology study
identified as appropriate for use in risk assessment. However, if a
NOAEL cannot be determined, the LOAEL or a Benchmark Dose (BMD)
approach is sometimes used for risk assessment. Uncertainty/safety
factors (UFs) are used in conjunction with the POD to take into account
uncertainties inherent in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data
to humans and in the variations in sensitivity among members of the
human population as well as other unknowns. Safety is assessed for
acute and chronic dietary risks by comparing aggregate food and water
exposure to the pesticide to the acute population adjusted dose (aPAD)
and chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD). The aPAD and cPAD are
calculated by dividing the POD by all applicable UFs. Aggregate short-
term, intermediate-term, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by
comparing food, water, and residential exposure to the POD to ensure
that the margin of exposure (MOE) called for by the product of all
applicable UFs is not exceeded. This latter value is referred to as the
Level of Concern (LOC).
For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any amount of
exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency estimates
risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the adverse effect
greater than that expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/
pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for cyprosulfamide used
for human risk assessment can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in
the document Cyprosulfamide: Human Health Risk Assessment for Proposed
Uses on Corn (Field, Sweet, and Pop), Sorghum (Seed Treatment),
Residential Turf and Ornamentals in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-
0042.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to cyprosulfamide, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances. No other tolerances have been established
for cyprosulfamide. EPA assessed dietary exposures from cyprosulfamide
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 cyprosulfamide; 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 Continuing Surveys
of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food,
EPA assumed that 100% of crops with requested uses of cyprosulfamide
are treated and that all treated crops contain residues at the
tolerance level.
iii. Cancer. Based on the results of carcinogenicity studies in
rats and mice, EPA classified cyprosulfamide as ``Not likely to be a
Carcinogen to Humans at doses that do not cause urothelial cytotoxicity
''; therefore, a cancer exposure assessment is unnecessary for this
chemical.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary
assessment for cyprosulfamide. Tolerance level residues and 100 PCT
were assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for cyprosulfamide in drinking water. These simulation
models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of cyprosulfamide. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure
assessment can be found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/
index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) and
Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models, the
estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of cyprosulfamide for
chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 2.4
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.14 ppb for ground
water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 2.4 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
Cyprosulfamide is proposed for registration on the following use
sites that could result in residential exposures: Residential
turfgrass, ornamentals and recreational sites. EPA assessed residential
exposure using the following assumptions: Homeowners who apply
cyprosulfamide to ornamentals and turfgrass may be exposed for short-
term durations via the dermal and inhalation routes. Short-term dermal
and inhalation exposures were assessed for residential handlers who
mix, load and apply liquid cyprosulfamide products using low-pressure
hand wands and garden hose-end sprayers.
There is also potential for short-term postapplication dermal
exposure of adults and children and incidental oral exposure of
children following application of cyprosulfamide to turf (e.g. home
lawns). EPA assessed adult and toddler postapplication dermal exposures
as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers from hand-to-mouth,
object-to-mouth and incidental soil ingestion activities.
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.''
Although cyprosulfamide has in common with other sulfonamide
chemicals the ability to cause urinary tract calculi and in some cases
tumors in the urinary tract at high doses, EPA has not made a common
mechanism finding for cyprosulfamide such that cumulative risk
assessment based on chemicals with a common mechanism is necessary for
cyprosulfamide and other sulfonamides. With cyprosulfamide, the
formation of calculi in the urinary tract results from the
precipitation of cyprosulfamide once it reaches saturation in the
animal's system. Precipitation of cyprosulfamide is a physical/chemical
process and not a mechanism of toxicity. Exposures to cyprosulfamide
and other sulfonamides, such as thiencarbazone-methyl, are not
[[Page 60972]]
additive with regard to the formation of urinary tract calculi at
anticipated exposure levels. At higher doses, each sulfonamide will
form calculi independently of the other by a separate physical/chemical
process. At lower doses, near the anticipated exposure levels, calculi
will not form even if there is exposure to multiple sulfonamides
because sulfonamides will not influence the formation of precipitates
by each other. It would be appropriate to add exposures in assessing
precipitate formation only if the sulfonamides interacted somehow
during crystal formation. 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 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(b)(2)(c) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA safety
factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The prenatal and postnatal
toxicity database for cyprosulfamide includes rat and rabbit
developmental toxicity studies and a 2-generation reproduction toxicity
study in rats. There was no evidence of increased susceptibility of in
utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal developmental studies or of young
rats in the 2-generation reproduction study.
No fetal effects were seen in the rat developmental toxicity study
at doses that produced maternal toxicity (weight gain effects and
indications of kidney effects in one animal). There are two rabbit
developmental studies available for cyprosulfamide. A second study was
conducted due to excess maternal toxicity (including deaths) in the
first study. As in the rat study, no fetal effects were seen in either
rabbit study at doses that resulted in maternal toxicity (body weight
decrease, reduced food consumption, and kidney effects in both studies;
as well as deaths in the first study).
In the rat reproduction study, effects in the pups occurred at
doses that also resulted in maternal toxicity. Mid-dose effects
included organ weight changes in the spleen and urinary tract in the
dams and body weight changes in the pups. At the high dose, there was
mortality among the dams associated with poor physical condition and
severe renal lesion; effects in pups at the high dose included
decreased pup weight, delayed vaginal opening (apparently related to
the decreased pup weight), reduced viability (3 total litter loss in
the F1 generation), reduced lactation index and clinical findings
(paleness, cold to touch, missing milk spot and thin appearance). No
increase in sensitivity of the pups was indicated.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for cyprosulfamide is complete, except for
immunotoxicity studies. EPA began requiring functional immunotoxicity
testing of all food and non-food use pesticides on December 26, 2007.
Since the requirement went into effect well after this tolerance
petition was submitted, these studies are not yet available for
cyprosulfamide. In the absence of specific immunotoxicity studies, EPA
has evaluated the available toxicity data for cyprosulfamide and
determined that an additional database uncertainty factor is not needed
to account for potential immunotoxicity. EPA's determination is based
on the following considerations.
a. There was some indication of possible immunotoxicity in the form
of increased severity of lymphocytolysis in the subchronic mouse study
in females, but only at a high dose of about 1,300 mg/kg/day. Although
minimal lymphocytolysis was seen in the control animals,
lymphocytolysis to a slightly greater degree was observed in some of
the high dose animals. This minor difference in severity is not of
concern because:
(1) The marginal change in severity between control and dosed
animals was only noted at a very high dose and may not constitute an
adverse effect.
(2) No similar effect was seen in the carcinogenicity study in the
mouse at about 600 mg/kg/day or in other species.
b. EPA considered the entire toxicity database for cyprosulfamide
for potential adverse effects on the thymus and spleen as indications
of potential immunotoxicity. Although changes in thymus weight and
shape and brown pigment in the spleen were noted, these were determined
to be non-specific changes not indicative of immunotoxicity.
c. Cyprosulfamide does not belong to a class of chemicals that
would be expected to be immunotoxic.
Therefore, based the considerations in this Unit, EPA does not
believe that conducting immunotoxicity testing will result in a NOAEL
less than the NOAEL of 39 mg/kg/day already established for
cyprosulfamide, and an additional factor (UFDB) for database
uncertainties is not needed to account for potential immunotoxicity.
ii. There is no indication that cyprosulfamide is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that cyprosulfamide results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed
assuming 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to cyprosulfamide in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure
of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
cyprosulfamide.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the aPAD and cPAD.
The aPAD and cPAD represent the highest safe exposures, taking into
account all appropriate SFs. EPA calculates the aPAD and cPAD by
dividing the POD by all applicable UFs. For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the probability of additional cancer cases given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-term, intermediate-term, and
chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate
food, water, and residential exposure to the POD to ensure that the MOE
called for by the
[[Page 60973]]
product of all applicable UFs is not exceeded.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account exposure estimates from acute dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified in the toxicology studies for cyprosulfamide and no
acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore, cyprosulfamide is not
expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
cyprosulfamide from food and water will utilize less than 1% of the
cPAD for the U.S. population and all population subgroups, including
infants and children. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3.,
regarding residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of cyprosulfamide is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure through
food and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
Cyprosulfamide is currently registered for uses that could result
in short-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that
it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water
with short-term residential exposures to cyprosulfamide. Using the
exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-term exposures,
EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water, and residential
exposures aggregated result in aggregate MOEs of 6,900 for adults and
5,300 for children (toddlers). The aggregate MOE for adults is based on
the residential turf scenario and includes combined food, drinking
water, dermal and inhalation exposures for residential handlers as well
as post-application dermal exposures from activities on treated turf.
The aggregate MOE for children includes food, drinking water and post-
application dermal and incidental oral exposures (hand-to-mouth,
object-to-mouth and soil ingestion) from activities on turf areas
previously treated with cyprosulfamide.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure through food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). Cyprosulfamide is not registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term residential exposure. Therefore, the
intermediate-term aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from exposure
to cyprosulfamide through food and water, which has already been
addressed, and will not be greater than the chronic aggregate risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. EPA classified
cyprosulfamide as ``Not likely to be a Carcinogen to Humans at doses
that do not cause urothelial cytotoxicity. '' Cyprosulfamide is not
expected to pose a cancer risk.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to cyprosulfamide residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology is available to enforce the
tolerance expression in plants (High Pressure Liquid Chromatography/
Mass Spectrometry/Mass Spectromety (HPLC/MS/MS) Method UB-008-P06-01)
and livestock commodities (HPLC/MS/MS Method UB-008-P06-01/02). 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 Codex, Canadian or Mexican maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established for residues of cyprosulfamide in crop or livestock
commodities. However, the U.S. is working with Canada and the United
Kingdom to achieve MRL harmonization for corn grain.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the metabolites to be included in the tolerance expression for
livestock, corn forage and corn stover commodities; modified tolerance
levels for corn stover commodities and field corn forage; and revised
the livestock commodities for which tolerances are needed as well as
the livestock commodity tolerance levels.
The petitioner proposed tolerances for residues of cyprosulfamide
and three metabolites (AE 0001789-sulfonamide-alanine, AE 0001789-
sulfonamide-lactate, and AE 0001789-N-cyclopropyl-4-sulfamoylbenzamide)
on corn forage and stover commodities as follows: Field corn forage at
0.15 ppm; field corn stover at 0.60 ppm; pop corn stover at 0.60 ppm;
sweet corn forage at 0.40 ppm; and sweet corn stover at 0.60 ppm. Based
on limited toxicity data for AE 0001789-N-cyclopropyl-4-
sulfamoylbenzamide, this metabolite cannot be excluded as a residue of
concern based on hazard considerations. The other two metabolites (AE
0001789-sulfonamide-alanine, AE 0001789-sulfonamide-lactate) are
expected to be less toxic than the parent compound based on structure
activity relationship (SAR) analysis and can thus be excluded as
residues of concern based on hazard considerations. In corn field
trials, residues of all four compounds were low (most below the limit
of quantitation of 0.01 ppm), with parent cyprosulfamide levels being
the highest of the four. Based on the lack of hazard concern for two of
the metabolites and the low levels of all three, EPA concluded that
parent cyprosulfamide is the residue of concern to be included in the
tolerance expression for corn commodities, including forage and stover.
The results of the field trials support tolerances for residues of
cyprosulfamide, per se, of 0.20 ppm in/on field corn forage and stover;
0.20 ppm in/on popcorn stover; 0.40 ppm in/on sweet corn forage; and
0.35 ppm in/on sweet corn stover.
The petitioner proposed tolerances for residues of cyprosulfamide,
per se, on meat (0.01 ppm), fat (0.01 ppm), liver (0.02 ppm) and kidney
(0.05 ppm) of cattle, goat, hog, horse and sheep; and milk (0.01 ppm).
As noted in this Unit, EPA concluded that the metabolite AE 0001789-N-
cyclopropyl-4-sulfamoylbenzamide (4-(aminosulfonyl)-N-
cyclopropylbenzamide) cannot be excluded as a residue of concern based
on hazard considerations. The data from the submitted cattle feeding
study indicate that no quantifiable residues of cyprosulfamide or this
metabolite are expected in milk, meat or fat. However, quantifiable
residues of cyprosulfamide and its metabolite may occur in meat
byproducts (kidney and liver) of cattle, goat, horse and sheep. Based
on the calculated dietary burden of swine, there is no reasonable
expectation of residues of cyprosulfamide or its metabolite in swine
(hog) commodities. Therefore, EPA determined that tolerances are needed
only for residues of cyprosulfamide and its metabolite (4-
(aminosulfonyl)-N-cyclopropylbenzamide) in/on the meat byproducts of
cattle, goat, horse and sheep. The submitted data and calculated
dietary burden for ruminants
[[Page 60974]]
indicate that a tolerance level of 0.02 ppm in these commodities is
appropriate.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of the herbicide
safener cyprosulfamide (N-[[4-[(cyclopropylamino)carbonyl]
phenyl]sulfonyl]-2-methoxybenzamide) in or on corn, field, forage at
0.20 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.01 ppm; corn, field, stover at 0.20
ppm; corn, pop, grain at 0.01 ppm; corn, pop, stover at 0.20 ppm; corn,
sweet, forage at 0.40 ppm; corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks
removed at 0.01 ppm; and corn, sweet, stover at 0.35 ppm; and for
combined residues of cyprosulfamide and its metabolite, 4-
(aminosulfonyl)-N-cyclopropylbenzamide, calculated as cyprosulfamide,
in or on cattle, meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm; goat, meat byproducts at
0.02 ppm; horse, meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm; and sheep, meat
byproducts at 0.02 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any special
considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal
Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: September 29, 2008.
Debra Edwards,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. Section 180.644 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 180.644 Cyprosulfamide; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of the
herbicide safener cyprosulfamide, N-[[4-[(cyclopropylamino)carbonyl]
phenyl]sulfonyl]-2-methoxybenzamide, in or on the following raw
agricultural commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corn, field, forage.................................. 0.20
Corn, field, grain................................... 0.01
Corn, field, stover.................................. 0.20
Corn, pop, grain..................................... 0.01
Corn, pop, stover.................................... 0.20
Corn, sweet, forage.................................. 0.40
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed...... 0.01
Corn, sweet, stover.................................. 0.35
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Tolerances are established for residues of the herbicide
safener cyprosulfamide, N-[[4-[(cyclopropylamino)carbonyl]
phenyl]sulfonyl]-2-methoxybenzamide, and its metabolite 4-
(aminosulfonyl)-N-cyclopropylbenzamide, calculated as cyprosulfamide,
in or on the following raw agricultural commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, meat byproducts.............................. 0.02
Goat, meat byproducts................................ 0.02
Horse, meat byproducts............................... 0.02
Sheep, meat byproducts............................... 0.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertant residues. [Reserved]
[FR Doc. E8-24034 Filed 10-14-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S