MCPB; Pesticide Tolerances, 66780-66786 [E8-26875]
Download as PDF
66780
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
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).
VIII. 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: October 31, 2008.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
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 180.449 is amended by
alphabetically adding a commodity to
the table in paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
■
§ 180.449 Avermectin B1 and its delta-8,9isomer; tolerances for residues.
*
Commodity
*
*
(b) *
0.005
*
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E8–26876 Filed 11–12–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0945; FRL–8387–1]
MCPB; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for combined residues of free
and conjugated MCPB and its metabolite
MCPA in or on peppermint, tops and
spearmint, tops. Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR–4) requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
November 12, 2008. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before January 12, 2009, and must
be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
*
Parts per million
bean, lima, seed
*
*
18:26 Nov 10, 2008
Jkt 217001
*
*
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Expiration/revocation date
12/31/10
*
OPP–2007–0945. 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., 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.
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.
E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM
12NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies
of this Document?
In addition to accessing electronically
available documents 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.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing
Request?
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2007–0945 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 January 12, 2009.
In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please
submit a copy of the filing that does not
contain any CBI for inclusion in the
public docket that is described in
ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2
may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit this copy,
identified by docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPP–2007–0945, 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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:26 Nov 10, 2008
Jkt 217001
II. Petition for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of October 24,
2007 (72 FR 60369) (FRL–8150–8), EPA
issued a notice pursuant to section
408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 7E7257) by
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201
W., Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.318 be
amended by establishing a tolerance for
residues of the herbicide MCPB, 4-(2methyl-4-chlorophenoxy) butyric acid,
in or on mint tops (leaves and stems) at
0.25 parts per million (ppm). That
notice referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Nufarm, Inc., the
registrant, on behalf of IR–4, 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 revised
the commodity terms and tolerance
level. EPA has also revised the tolerance
expression to include combined
residues of free and conjugated MCPB
and its metabolite MCPA. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
66781
aggregate exposure for the petitioned-for
tolerances for combined residues of free
and conjugated MCPB and its metabolite
MCPA on peppermint, tops and
spearmint, tops at 0.20 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.
The currently available toxicological
database for MCPB is limited; thus it
was supplemented with data on the
closely related compound, 4-(chloro-2methylphenoxy)acetic acid (MCPA).
Structurally, MCPB and MCPA differ
only in that MCPB contains two
additional carbon atoms. In both animal
and plant metabolism studies, the data
indicate that MCPB is readily converted
to MCPA. Therefore, EPA has concluded
that the toxicity of these compounds is
similar at sub-lethal dose levels.
MCPB has low to moderate acute
toxicity via the oral, dermal and
inhalation routes of exposure. It is
mildly to moderately irritating to the
eye but is not a dermal irritant or skin
sensitizer. In longer-term studies,
nephrotoxicity and hepatotoxicity
appear to be the most prevalent hazard
concerns for MCPB, based on the effects
seen throughout the MCPA database and
the limited toxicity data set available for
MCPB. Signs of neurotoxicity
(decreased arousal, impaired
coordination and gait, reduced motor
activity and reduced grip strength) were
also reported after MCPB or MCPA
exposure. Developmental and
reproduction toxicity studies conducted
with MCPB and/or MCPA did not
indicate an enhanced sensitivity or
susceptibility of the young, as
developmental effects (delayed
ossifications and decreased fetal or pup
body weight) occurred at the same doses
eliciting toxicity in the parental animals
(mortality, decreased body weight, body
weight gain and food consumption and
increased absolute and relative ovary
weights). MCPB and MCPA have been
classified as ‘‘not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans’’ based on the
absence of increased numbers of tumors
in the rat and mouse carcinogenicity
studies and no evidence of
mutagenicity.
E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM
12NOR1
66782
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by MCPB and MCPA, 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 4(4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)butanoic
acid (MCPB); Human-Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Section 3 New
Use on Mint, page 29 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0945.
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold
below which there is no appreciable
risk, a toxicological point of departure
(POD) is identified as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk
assessment. The POD may be defined as
the highest dose at which no adverse
effects are observed (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) 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 MCPB used for human
risk assessment is shown in the
following Table.
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR MCPB FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK ASSESSMENT
Point of Departure and Uncertainty/Safety Factors
Acute dietary
(General population
including infants
and children; and
females 13–50
years of age)
NOAEL = 200 milligrams/
kilograms/day (mg/kg/day)
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 10x (UFDB)
Acute RfD = 0.2 mg/kg/day
aPAD = 0.2 mg/kg/day
Acute neurotoxicity (MCPA), rat
LOAEL = 400 mg/kg/day based on gait impairment in males
Chronic dietary
(All populations)
NOAEL= 4.4 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 10x (UFDB)
Chronic RfD = 0.0044 mg/kg/day
cPAD = 0.0044 mg/kg/day
Chronic toxicity (MCPA), rat
LOAEL = 17.6 mg/kg/day based on liver and
kidney toxicity.
Dermal short-term
(1 to 30 days) and
intermediate-term
(1 to 6 months)
Dermal study
NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 100
21-Day dermal toxicity (MCPA), rabbit
NOAEL = 100
LOAEL = 1,000 mg/kg/day based on kidney toxicity and decreased body weight gain
Dermal absorption of MCPB is 4x that of
MCPA.
Dermal long-term
(> 6 months)
Oral study
NOAEL = 4.4 mg/kg/day
(dermal absorption rate =
31%)
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 100
Chronic toxicity (MCPA), rat
LOAEL = 17.6 mg/kg/day based on liver and
kidney toxicity.
Inhalation shortterm
(1 to 30 days) and
intermediate-term
(1 to 6 months)
Oral study
NOAEL= 5 mg/kg/day (inhalation absorption rate =
100%)
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 100
Developmental toxicity (MCPB), rabbit
LOAEL = 20 mg/kg/day based on maternal mortality
Inhalation long-term
(> 6 months)
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Exposure/Scenario
Oralstudy NOAEL = 4.4 mg/
kg/day (inhalation absorption rate = 100%)
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 100
Chronic toxicity (MCPA), rat
LOAEL = 17.6 mg/kg/day based on liver and
kidney toxicity
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:26 Nov 10, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
RfD, PAD, LOC for Risk Assessment
Frm 00068
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Study and Toxicological Effects
E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM
12NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
66783
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR MCPB FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK ASSESSMENT—
Continued
Exposure/Scenario
Point of Departure and Uncertainty/Safety Factors
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation)
RfD, PAD, LOC for Risk Assessment
Study and Toxicological Effects
Classification: Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population
(intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term risk assessment. UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern.
C. Exposure Assessment
While the Agency has concluded that
MCPB converts to MCPA in the
environment, and that MCPA may be
present in crops, residues of MCPA
resulting from the existing use of MCPB
on peas and the new use on mint are
expected to be negligible, and
significantly below analytical method
limits of detection. These residues will
not contribute significantly to the
aggregate exposure to MCPA from other
sources, and, therefore, EPA did not
conduct an aggregate assessment
combining MCPA exposures from
MCPA and MCPB uses. The exposure
assessments presented here are for
MCPB only. A discussion of aggregate
risks associated with MCPA can be
found in the MCPA Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED), available on
the Office of Pesticide Programs web
site at https://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/
REDs/mcpa_red.pdf
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to MCPB, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as the existing MCPB
tolerance in 40 CFR 180.318 on peas,
the only commodity for which a
tolerance currently exists. EPA assessed
dietary exposures from MCPB in food as
follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide,
if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1–day or single
exposure.
In estimating acute dietary exposure,
EPA used food consumption
information from the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1994–1996 and 1998 Nationwide
Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by
Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels
in food, EPA assumed that all pea and
mint commodities contain tolerancelevel residues and that 100 percent of
pea and mint commodities are treated
with MCPB.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:26 Nov 10, 2008
Jkt 217001
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998
CSFII. As in the acute exposure
assessment, EPA assumed tolerancelevel residues and 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) for all pea and mint
commodities.
iii. Cancer. Based on the results of
carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice,
EPA classified MCPB as ‘‘not likely to
be carcinogenic to humans.’’ Therefore,
an exposure assessment for evaluating
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue or PCT information
in the dietary assessment for MCPB.
Tolerance level residues and/or 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 MCPB in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of MCPB.
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 MCPB
for acute exposures are estimated to be
54.7 parts per billion (ppb) for surface
water and 2.1 ppb for ground water. The
EDWCs for chronic exposures for noncancer assessments are estimated to be
13.5 ppb for surface water and 2.1 ppb
for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
acute dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value of 54.7 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 13.5 ppb was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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).
MCPB is not registered for any
specific use patterns that would result
in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found MCPB to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and MCPB does
not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has assumed that MCPB
does not have a common mechanism of
toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA’s efforts to
determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to
evaluate the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(c) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA safety factor (SF). In applying this
provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM
12NOR1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
66784
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
The prenatal and postnatal toxicology
database for MCPB includes rat and
rabbit developmental toxicity studies;
for MCPA it includes rat and rabbit
developmental toxicity studies and a 2generation reproduction toxicity study
in rats. There was no evidence of
increased quantitative or qualitative
susceptibility of fetuses or offspring to
MCPA or MCPB exposure in any of
these studies. In the developmental rat
studies with MCPB and MCPA,
decreased ossification and decreased
fetal body weights occurred at the same
dose causing maternal effects (decreased
body weight gain and food
consumption). No toxicity to fetuses
occurred in the MCPB and MCPA rabbit
developmental studies at doses resulting
in maternal toxicity (mortality,
decreased body weight and food
consumption). In the rat reproduction
study for MCPA, the only offspring
toxicity was decreased weight gain
while nursing, which occurred at the
same dose causing maternal toxicity
(increased absolute and relative ovary
weights).
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that the FQPA safety factor of 10X must
be retained as a database uncertainty
factor for MCPB acute and chronic risk
assessments. This decision is based on
the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for MCPB is
not complete. Additional data
pertaining to MCPB’s potential to cause
developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) or
immunotoxicity are outstanding. EPA’s
assessment of the uncertainties arising
from these data deficiencies follows:
a. Developmental neurotoxicity: EPA
has required a developmental
neurotoxicity study to be submitted
because neurotoxicity was found in
acute and subchronic neurotoxicity
studies with MCPA in rats (decreased
arousal, impaired coordination and gait,
reduced motor activity, reduced grip
strength), and similar signs of
neurotoxicity can be expected with
MCPB. The neurotoxic effects seen in
the acute neurotoxicity studies were the
most sensitive acute effect identified
and therefore were used in calculating
the aRfD for MCPB. Given these findings
of neurotoxicity and sensitivity of the
neurotoxic effects, EPA has concluded
that it lacks reliable data to remove the
FQPA 10X safety factor.
b. Immunotoxicity: EPA began
requiring functional immunotoxicity
testing (series 870.7800) of all food and
non-food use pesticides on December
26, 2007. Since the requirement went
into effect after this tolerance petition
was submitted, these studies are not yet
available for MCPB. In the absence of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:26 Nov 10, 2008
Jkt 217001
specific immunotoxicity studies, EPA
has evaluated the available toxicity data
for MCPB and MCPA regarding
potential immunotoxic effects. Evidence
of potential immunotoxicity was
observed in subchronic 28–day oral
toxicity studies in the mouse and dog
with MCPA. Involution of the spleen
due to lymphocytic depletion was
observed in both sexes at the highest
dose tested (HDT) and LOAEL of 453.7/
223.9 milligrams kilogram day (mg/kg/
day) male/female (M/F) in the mouse,
and decreased thymus weights were
seen in the dog at a dose of 30 mg/kg/
day HDT. Lymphoid depletion was
observed in the subchronic toxicity
study in the dog at a dose of 44 mg/kg/
day (HDT) of MCPB. The NOAEL in the
mouse and dog for potential
immunotoxic effects was 173.4/69.2 mg/
kg/day M/F and 20 mg/kg/day,
respectively. The NOAEL being used for
calculation of the chronic reference dose
(cRfD) is 4.4 mg/kg/day. The NOAEL
from the mouse study (173.4/69.2 mg/
kg/day (M/F)) provides the more
appropriate reference for evaluating
potential immunotoxic effects in
humans. Unlike rodents and humans,
dogs are uniquely sensitive to the toxic
effects of chlorophenoxy compounds
such as MCPB due to their decreased
ability to excrete organic acids, and thus
the effect levels in the mouse are more
relevant to potential immunotoxicity in
humans.
After weighing this evidence, EPA
retains significant uncertainty regarding
potential neurotoxic effects in infants
and children but does not have such
concerns for immunotoxicity. The
immunotoxic effects with most
relevance to humans had a NOAEL over
10X greater than the NOAEL used in
establishing the cRfD. On the other
hand, neurotoxic effects were the most
sensitive acute effects seen in the
database. Additionally, the DNT study
specifically addresses potential risks to
developing animals. Given these
considerations, EPA has concluded that
it lacks reliable data to remove the
FQPA children’s safety factor.
ii. There is no evidence that MCPB or
MCPA 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.
iii. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100 PCT and
tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumption’s
in the ground and surface water
modeling used to assess exposure to
MCPB in drinking water, and residential
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
exposures are not expected. These
assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by MCPB.
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
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. Using the exposure assumptions
discussed in this unit for acute
exposure, the acute dietary exposure
from food and water to MCPB will
occupy 5.4% of the aPAD for infants,
less than one year old, the population
group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to MCPB from
food and water will utilize 22% of the
cPAD for infants, less than one year old,
the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. There are no
residential uses for MCPB.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). MCPB is not registered
for any use patterns that would result in
residential exposure. Therefore, the
short-term aggregate risk is the sum of
the risk from exposure to MCPB through
food and water and will not be greater
than the chronic aggregate risk.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
MCPB 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 MCPB through food and
E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM
12NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
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 has classified MCPB
into the category ‘‘Not Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans’’. MCPB 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 MCPB
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(Gas chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry) is available to enforce the
tolerance expression. The method 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 established or proposed
Codex, Canadian, or Mexican maximum
residue limits (MRLs) for MCPB.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
IR–4 proposed a tolerance for residues
of MCPB per se on mint tops (leaves and
stems) at 0.25 ppm. EPA has determined
that separate tolerances at 0.20 ppm
should be established for combined
residues of free and conjugated MCPB
(4-(4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)butanoic
acid) and MCPA (4-chloro-2methylphenoxy)acetic acid) on the
commodities ‘‘spearmint, tops’’ and
‘‘peppermint, tops. The commodity
terms were revised to agree with the
preferred commodity terms in the
Agency’s Food and Feed Commodity
Vocabulary. EPA determined the
appropriate tolerance level for mint tops
based on analysis of the residue field
trial data using the Agency’s Tolerance
Spreadsheet in accordance with the
Agency’s Guidance for Setting Pesticide
Tolerances Based on Field Trial Data.
Finally, EPA revised the residues of
concern to be included in the tolerance
expression based on the results of plant
metabolism studies.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for combined residues of free and
conjugated MCPB and MCPA in or on
peppermint, tops and spearmint, tops at
0.20 ppm.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:26 Nov 10, 2008
Jkt 217001
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,
entitled 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
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
66785
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: October 31, 2008.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
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 180.318 is amended in
paragraph (a) by redesignating the
existing text as paragraph (a)(1) and by
adding paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:
■
180.318 4-(2-Methyl-4-chlorophenoxy)
butyric acid; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. (1) * * *
(2) Tolerances are established for the
combined residues, free and conjugated,
of the herbicide MCPB, 4-(4-chloro-2methylphenoxy)butanoic acid, and its
metabolite MCPA, (4-chloro-2methylphenoxy)acetic acid, in or on the
following food commodities:
E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM
12NOR1
66786
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 12, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Commodity
Parts per million
Peppermint, tops ..............................................................................................................................................
Spearmint, tops ................................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E8–26875 Filed 11–10–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Parts 571 and 585
[Docket No. NHTSA–08–0168]
RIN 2127–AK02
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Occupant Crash Protection
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NHTSA is amending Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
No. 208, ‘‘Occupant crash protection,’’
to update many of the child restraint
systems (CRSs) listed in Appendix A of
the standard. The CRSs in Appendix A
are used by NHTSA to test advanced air
bag suppression or low risk deployment
systems, to ensure that the air bag
systems pose no reasonable safety risk
to infants and small children in the real
world. The amendments replace the
CRSs listed in Appendix A with CRSs
that are more available and more
representative of the CRS fleet currently
on the market.
DATES: If you wish to petition for
reconsideration of this rule, your
petition must be received by December
29, 2008.
Effective date: The date on which this
final rule amends the CFR is January 12,
2009.
This final rule adopts a one-year
phase-in of the requirement to test with
the child restraints in the revised
Appendix A. Under the phase-in, 50
percent of vehicles manufactured on or
after September 1, 2009 must be
certified as meeting FMVSS No. 208
when tested with the CRSs on the
revised Appendix A, and all vehicles
manufactured on or after September 1,
2010 must be so certified.
ADDRESSES: If you wish to petition for
reconsideration of this rule, you should
refer in your petition to the docket
number of this document and submit
your petition to: Administrator,
National Highway Traffic Safety
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:26 Nov 10, 2008
Jkt 217001
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., West Building,
Washington, DC 20590.
The petition will be placed in the
docket. Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all documents
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carla Cuentas, Office of
Crashworthiness Standards, Light Duty
Vehicle Division (telephone 202–366–
4583, fax 202–493–2739). For legal
issues, contact Deirdre Fujita, Office of
Chief Counsel (telephone 202–366–
2992, fax 202–366–3820). You may send
mail to these officials at the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building,
Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Factors for Decision-Making
a. Guiding Factors
b. Child Restraint Data
c. Additional Considerations
III. Proposed Changes
IV. Comments and Agency Responses on
CRSs in Appendix A
a. Deletions
b. Additions (Identified in Table 1)
1. Proposed Inclusion of Graco Snugride to
Subpart B
2. Proposed Inclusion of Peg Perego Primo
Viaggio #IMCC00US to Subpart B
3. Proposed Inclusion of the Evenflo
Generations #352 to Subpart C
4. Proposed Inclusion of Cosco Summit
Deluxe #22–260 to Subpart C
5. Proposed Inclusion of the Graco SafeSeat
(Step 2) #8B02 to Subpart C
c. Updating Other CRSs in Appendix A
(Identified in Table 2)
1. Angel Guard Angel Ride #AA2403FOF
(Subpart A)
2. Cosco Arriva #22–013 (Subpart B)
3. Britax Roundabout #E9L02 (Subpart C)
4. Graco ComfortSport (Subpart C)
5. Evenflo Tribute V Deluxe #379 (Subpart
C)
6. Graco Cherished Cargo (Subpart D)
7. Cosco High Back Booster #22–209
(Subpart D)
V. Compliance Date
VI. Early Compliance and Picking and
Choosing of CRSs
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
0.20
0.20
VII. Testing Issues
a. Positioning of Adjustable Features
b. Testing the Car Bed
c. Testing Forward-Facing-Only CRSs in
Rear-Facing Configurations
d. Specifying the Type Of Harness Used
For Testing
VIII. Suggestions for Future Amendments
a. Publishing a Yearly Bulletin
b. Meaning of ‘‘Available for Purchase’’
c. Developing ‘‘standard’’ models of CRSs
d. Define ‘‘model’’ in Child Restraint
System Standard
e. Rear-Facing CRSs With High Profiles
IX. Specification of a Manufactured On or
After Date for the Newly Added CRSs
X. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
This final rule amends FMVSS No.
208 to update the child restraint systems
(CRSs) listed in Appendix A of the
standard. The notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) preceding this final
rule was published on September 25,
2007 (72 FR 54402; Docket 2007–
28710).
I. Background
FMVSS No. 208 (49 CFR 571.208)
requires passenger cars and trucks,
buses, and multipurpose passenger
vehicles with a gross vehicle weight
rating (GVWR) of 3,856 kilograms (kg)
(8,500 pounds (lb)) or less and an
unloaded vehicle weight of 2,495 kg
(5,500 lb) or less to be equipped with
seat belts and frontal air bags for the
protection of vehicle occupants in
crashes. While air bags have been very
effective in protecting people in
moderate and high speed frontal
crashes, there have been instances in
which they have caused serious or fatal
injuries to occupants who were very
close to the air bag when it deployed.
On May 12, 2000, NHTSA published a
final rule to require that air bags be
designed to create less risk of serious air
bag-induced injuries and provide
improved frontal crash protection for all
occupants, by means that include
advanced air bag technology
(‘‘Advanced Air Bag Rule,’’ 65 FR
30680, Docket No. NHTSA 00–7013).
Under the Advanced Air Bag Rule, to
minimize the risk to infants and small
children from deploying air bags,
manufacturers may suppress an air bag
in the presence of a CRS or provide a
low risk deployment (LRD) system.1
1 The LRD option involves deployment of the air
bag in the presence of a Child Restraint Air Bag
Interaction (CRABI) test dummy, representing a 12month-old child, in a rear-facing child restraint.
E:\FR\FM\12NOR1.SGM
12NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 219 (Wednesday, November 12, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66780-66786]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-26875]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0945; FRL-8387-1]
MCPB; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for combined residues
of free and conjugated MCPB and its metabolite MCPA in or on
peppermint, tops and spearmint, tops. Interregional Research Project
Number 4 (IR-4) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective November 12, 2008. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before January 12, 2009,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0945. 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., 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.
[[Page 66781]]
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document?
In addition to accessing electronically available documents 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, 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0945 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 January 12, 2009.
In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket that is described in ADDRESSES. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit this copy, identified by docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0945, 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.
II. Petition for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of October 24, 2007 (72 FR 60369) (FRL-
8150-8), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
7E7257) by Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College
Road East, Suite 201 W., Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested
that 40 CFR 180.318 be amended by establishing a tolerance for residues
of the herbicide MCPB, 4-(2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxy) butyric acid, in or
on mint tops (leaves and stems) at 0.25 parts per million (ppm). That
notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Nufarm, Inc.,
the registrant, on behalf of IR-4, 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
revised the commodity terms and tolerance level. EPA has also revised
the tolerance expression to include combined residues of free and
conjugated MCPB and its metabolite MCPA. 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 combined residues of free and conjugated MCPB and its
metabolite MCPA on peppermint, tops and spearmint, tops at 0.20 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.
The currently available toxicological database for MCPB is limited;
thus it was supplemented with data on the closely related compound, 4-
(chloro-2-methylphenoxy)acetic acid (MCPA). Structurally, MCPB and MCPA
differ only in that MCPB contains two additional carbon atoms. In both
animal and plant metabolism studies, the data indicate that MCPB is
readily converted to MCPA. Therefore, EPA has concluded that the
toxicity of these compounds is similar at sub-lethal dose levels.
MCPB has low to moderate acute toxicity via the oral, dermal and
inhalation routes of exposure. It is mildly to moderately irritating to
the eye but is not a dermal irritant or skin sensitizer. In longer-term
studies, nephrotoxicity and hepatotoxicity appear to be the most
prevalent hazard concerns for MCPB, based on the effects seen
throughout the MCPA database and the limited toxicity data set
available for MCPB. Signs of neurotoxicity (decreased arousal, impaired
coordination and gait, reduced motor activity and reduced grip
strength) were also reported after MCPB or MCPA exposure. Developmental
and reproduction toxicity studies conducted with MCPB and/or MCPA did
not indicate an enhanced sensitivity or susceptibility of the young, as
developmental effects (delayed ossifications and decreased fetal or pup
body weight) occurred at the same doses eliciting toxicity in the
parental animals (mortality, decreased body weight, body weight gain
and food consumption and increased absolute and relative ovary
weights). MCPB and MCPA have been classified as ``not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans'' based on the absence of increased numbers of
tumors in the rat and mouse carcinogenicity studies and no evidence of
mutagenicity.
[[Page 66782]]
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by MCPB and MCPA, 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 4-(4-chloro-2-
methylphenoxy)butanoic acid (MCPB); Human-Health Risk Assessment for
Proposed Section 3 New Use on Mint, page 29 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2007-0945.
B. Toxicological Endpoints
For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, a toxicological point of departure (POD) is
identified as the basis for derivation of reference values for risk
assessment. The POD may be defined as the highest dose at which no
adverse effects are observed (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) 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 MCPB used for human
risk assessment is shown in the following Table.
Table 1.--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for MCPB for Use in Human Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of Departure and
Exposure/Scenario Uncertainty/Safety RfD, PAD, LOC for Risk Study and Toxicological
Factors Assessment Effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary NOAEL = 200 milligrams/ Acute RfD = 0.2 mg/kg/ Acute neurotoxicity
(General population including infants kilograms/day (mg/kg/ day (MCPA), rat
and children; and females 13-50 day) aPAD = 0.2 mg/kg/day... LOAEL = 400 mg/kg/day
years of age). UFA = 10x.............. based on gait
UFH = 10x.............. impairment in males
FQPA SF = 10x (UFDB)...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary NOAEL= 4.4 mg/kg/day Chronic RfD = 0.0044 mg/ Chronic toxicity
(All populations).................... UFA = 10x.............. kg/day (MCPA), rat
UFH = 10x.............. cPAD = 0.0044 mg/kg/day LOAEL = 17.6 mg/kg/day
FQPA SF = 10x (UFDB)... based on liver and
kidney toxicity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dermal short-term Dermal study LOC for MOE = 100 21-Day dermal toxicity
(1 to 30 days) and intermediate-term NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day... (MCPA), rabbit
(1 to 6 months). UFA = 10x.............. NOAEL = 100
UFH = 10x.............. LOAEL = 1,000 mg/kg/day
FQPA SF = 1x........... based on kidney
toxicity and decreased
body weight gain
Dermal absorption of
MCPB is 4x that of
MCPA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dermal long-term Oral study LOC for MOE = 100 Chronic toxicity
(> 6 months)......................... NOAEL = 4.4 mg/kg/day (MCPA), rat
(dermal absorption LOAEL = 17.6 mg/kg/day
rate = 31%). based on liver and
UFA = 10x.............. kidney toxicity.
UFH = 10x..............
FQPA SF = 1x...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inhalation short-term Oral study LOC for MOE = 100 Developmental toxicity
(1 to 30 days) and intermediate-term NOAEL= 5 mg/kg/day (MCPB), rabbit
(1 to 6 months). (inhalation absorption LOAEL = 20 mg/kg/day
rate = 100%). based on maternal
UFA = 10x.............. mortality
UFH = 10x..............
FQPA SF = 1x...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inhalation long-term (> 6 months) Oralstudy NOAEL = 4.4 LOC for MOE = 100 Chronic toxicity
mg/kg/day (inhalation (MCPA), rat
absorption rate = LOAEL = 17.6 mg/kg/day
100%) based on liver and
UFA = 10x.............. kidney toxicity
UFH = 10x..............
FQPA SF = 1x...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 66783]]
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members
of the human population (intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term
study for long-term risk assessment. UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. FQPA
SF = FQPA Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. MOE =
margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern.
C. Exposure Assessment
While the Agency has concluded that MCPB converts to MCPA in the
environment, and that MCPA may be present in crops, residues of MCPA
resulting from the existing use of MCPB on peas and the new use on mint
are expected to be negligible, and significantly below analytical
method limits of detection. These residues will not contribute
significantly to the aggregate exposure to MCPA from other sources,
and, therefore, EPA did not conduct an aggregate assessment combining
MCPA exposures from MCPA and MCPB uses. The exposure assessments
presented here are for MCPB only. A discussion of aggregate risks
associated with MCPA can be found in the MCPA Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED), available on the Office of Pesticide
Programs web site at https://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/mcpa_red.pdf
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to MCPB, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as the existing MCPB tolerance in 40 CFR 180.318 on
peas, the only commodity for which a tolerance currently exists. EPA
assessed dietary exposures from MCPB in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1994-1996 and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by
Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed that all
pea and mint commodities contain tolerance-level residues and that 100
percent of pea and mint commodities are treated with MCPB.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 CSFII. As in the acute exposure assessment, EPA assumed
tolerance-level residues and 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all pea
and mint commodities.
iii. Cancer. Based on the results of carcinogenicity studies in
rats and mice, EPA classified MCPB as ``not likely to be carcinogenic
to humans.'' Therefore, an exposure assessment for evaluating cancer
risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary assessment for
MCPB. Tolerance level residues and/or 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 MCPB in drinking water. These simulation models take
into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of MCPB. 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 MCPB for acute
exposures are estimated to be 54.7 parts per billion (ppb) for surface
water and 2.1 ppb for ground water. The EDWCs for chronic exposures for
non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 13.5 ppb for surface water
and 2.1 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 54.7 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 13.5 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).
MCPB is not registered for any specific use patterns that would
result in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found MCPB to share a common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and MCPB does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that MCPB does not have a
common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information
regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(c) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA safety
factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
[[Page 66784]]
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The prenatal and postnatal
toxicology database for MCPB includes rat and rabbit developmental
toxicity studies; for MCPA it includes rat and rabbit developmental
toxicity studies and a 2-generation reproduction toxicity study in
rats. There was no evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative
susceptibility of fetuses or offspring to MCPA or MCPB exposure in any
of these studies. In the developmental rat studies with MCPB and MCPA,
decreased ossification and decreased fetal body weights occurred at the
same dose causing maternal effects (decreased body weight gain and food
consumption). No toxicity to fetuses occurred in the MCPB and MCPA
rabbit developmental studies at doses resulting in maternal toxicity
(mortality, decreased body weight and food consumption). In the rat
reproduction study for MCPA, the only offspring toxicity was decreased
weight gain while nursing, which occurred at the same dose causing
maternal toxicity (increased absolute and relative ovary weights).
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that the FQPA safety factor of
10X must be retained as a database uncertainty factor for MCPB acute
and chronic risk assessments. This decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for MCPB is not complete. Additional data
pertaining to MCPB's potential to cause developmental neurotoxicity
(DNT) or immunotoxicity are outstanding. EPA's assessment of the
uncertainties arising from these data deficiencies follows:
a. Developmental neurotoxicity: EPA has required a developmental
neurotoxicity study to be submitted because neurotoxicity was found in
acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies with MCPA in rats (decreased
arousal, impaired coordination and gait, reduced motor activity,
reduced grip strength), and similar signs of neurotoxicity can be
expected with MCPB. The neurotoxic effects seen in the acute
neurotoxicity studies were the most sensitive acute effect identified
and therefore were used in calculating the aRfD for MCPB. Given these
findings of neurotoxicity and sensitivity of the neurotoxic effects,
EPA has concluded that it lacks reliable data to remove the FQPA 10X
safety factor.
b. Immunotoxicity: EPA began requiring functional immunotoxicity
testing (series 870.7800) of all food and non-food use pesticides on
December 26, 2007. Since the requirement went into effect after this
tolerance petition was submitted, these studies are not yet available
for MCPB. In the absence of specific immunotoxicity studies, EPA has
evaluated the available toxicity data for MCPB and MCPA regarding
potential immunotoxic effects. Evidence of potential immunotoxicity was
observed in subchronic 28-day oral toxicity studies in the mouse and
dog with MCPA. Involution of the spleen due to lymphocytic depletion
was observed in both sexes at the highest dose tested (HDT) and LOAEL
of 453.7/223.9 milligrams kilogram day (mg/kg/day) male/female (M/F) in
the mouse, and decreased thymus weights were seen in the dog at a dose
of 30 mg/kg/day HDT. Lymphoid depletion was observed in the subchronic
toxicity study in the dog at a dose of 44 mg/kg/day (HDT) of MCPB. The
NOAEL in the mouse and dog for potential immunotoxic effects was 173.4/
69.2 mg/kg/day M/F and 20 mg/kg/day, respectively. The NOAEL being used
for calculation of the chronic reference dose (cRfD) is 4.4 mg/kg/day.
The NOAEL from the mouse study (173.4/69.2 mg/kg/day (M/F)) provides
the more appropriate reference for evaluating potential immunotoxic
effects in humans. Unlike rodents and humans, dogs are uniquely
sensitive to the toxic effects of chlorophenoxy compounds such as MCPB
due to their decreased ability to excrete organic acids, and thus the
effect levels in the mouse are more relevant to potential
immunotoxicity in humans.
After weighing this evidence, EPA retains significant uncertainty
regarding potential neurotoxic effects in infants and children but does
not have such concerns for immunotoxicity. The immunotoxic effects with
most relevance to humans had a NOAEL over 10X greater than the NOAEL
used in establishing the cRfD. On the other hand, neurotoxic effects
were the most sensitive acute effects seen in the database.
Additionally, the DNT study specifically addresses potential risks to
developing animals. Given these considerations, EPA has concluded that
it lacks reliable data to remove the FQPA children's safety factor.
ii. There is no evidence that MCPB or MCPA 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.
iii. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumption's in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to MCPB in drinking water, and residential exposures
are not expected. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure
and risks posed by MCPB.
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 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. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit
for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water to
MCPB will occupy 5.4% of the aPAD for infants, less than one year old,
the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
MCPB from food and water will utilize 22% of the cPAD for infants, less
than one year old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for MCPB.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). MCPB is not
registered for any use patterns that would result in residential
exposure. Therefore, the short-term aggregate risk is the sum of the
risk from exposure to MCPB through food and water and will not be
greater than the chronic aggregate risk.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). MCPB 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 MCPB
through food and
[[Page 66785]]
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 has classified
MCPB into the category ``Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans''.
MCPB 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 MCPB residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (Gas chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry) is available to enforce the tolerance expression. The
method 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 established or proposed Codex, Canadian, or Mexican
maximum residue limits (MRLs) for MCPB.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
IR-4 proposed a tolerance for residues of MCPB per se on mint tops
(leaves and stems) at 0.25 ppm. EPA has determined that separate
tolerances at 0.20 ppm should be established for combined residues of
free and conjugated MCPB (4-(4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)butanoic acid)
and MCPA (4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)acetic acid) on the commodities
``spearmint, tops'' and ``peppermint, tops. The commodity terms were
revised to agree with the preferred commodity terms in the Agency's
Food and Feed Commodity Vocabulary. EPA determined the appropriate
tolerance level for mint tops based on analysis of the residue field
trial data using the Agency's Tolerance Spreadsheet in accordance with
the Agency's Guidance for Setting Pesticide Tolerances Based on Field
Trial Data. Finally, EPA revised the residues of concern to be included
in the tolerance expression based on the results of plant metabolism
studies.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for combined residues of free
and conjugated MCPB and MCPA in or on peppermint, tops and spearmint,
tops at 0.20 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, entitled 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: October 31, 2008.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, 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 180.318 is amended in paragraph (a) by redesignating the
existing text as paragraph (a)(1) and by adding paragraph (a)(2) to
read as follows:
180.318 4-(2-Methyl-4-chlorophenoxy) butyric acid; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. (1) * * *
(2) Tolerances are established for the combined residues, free and
conjugated, of the herbicide MCPB, 4-(4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)butanoic
acid, and its metabolite MCPA, (4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)acetic acid,
in or on the following food commodities:
[[Page 66786]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peppermint, tops.................... 0.20
Spearmint, tops..................... 0.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E8-26875 Filed 11-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S