Thiamethoxam; Pesticide Tolerances, 15869-15876 [E9-7966]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
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).
X. 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).
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:13 Apr 07, 2009
Jkt 217001
Dated: March 20, 2009.
Janet L. Andersen,
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution
Prevention 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 180.1128 is revised to read
as follows:
■
§ 180.1128 Bacillus subtilis MBI 600;
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance.
An exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance is established for residues
of the biofungicide Bacillus subtilis MBI
600 in or on all food commodities,
including residues resulting from postharvest uses, when applied or used in
accordance with good agricultural
practices.
[FR Doc. E9–7172 Filed 4–7–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0167; FRL–8407–8]
Thiamethoxam; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for combined residues of
thiamethoxam and its metabolite CGA322704 in or on citrus fruits, citrus
pulp, tree nuts, almond hulls, and
pistachios. Syngenta Crop Protection,
Inc., requested these tolerances under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective April
8, 2009. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
June 8, 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).
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2008–0167. 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,
ADDRESSES:
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
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: Julie
Chao, Registration Division (7505P),
Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 308–8735; e-mail address:
chao.julie@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
PO 00000
15869
Sfmt 4700
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 electronically
available documents at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may access
this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
15870
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
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 e-CFR
cite at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 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–2008–0167 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 June 8, 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–2008–0167, 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., N.W., 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 April 16,
2008 (73 FR 20632) (FRL–8359–1), 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 7F7293) by
Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc., P.O. Box
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:13 Apr 07, 2009
Jkt 217001
18300, Greensboro, NC 27419–8300.
The petition requested that 40 CFR
180.565 be amended by establishing
tolerances for combined residues of the
insecticide thiamethoxam [3-[(2-chloro5-thiazolyl)methyl]tetrahydro-5-methylN-nitro-4H-1,3,5-oxadiazin-4-imine] and
its metabolite CGA-322704 [N-(2-chlorothiazol-5-ylmethyl)-N’-methyl-N’-nitroguanidine], in or on fruit, citrus (crop
group 10) at 0.3 parts per million (ppm);
almond, nut, tree (crop group 14)
including pistachio at 0.02 ppm; and
almond hulls at 1.2 ppm. That notice
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection,
Inc., 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
determined that the tolerance level for
citrus (crop group 10) needs to be
raised, and that separate tolerances need
to be established for pistachios and
citrus, dried pulp. 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
thiamethoxam and its metabolite CGA322704 on nut, tree (crop group 14) at
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
0.02 ppm; almond, hulls at 1.2 ppm;
fruit, citrus (crop group 10) at 0.40 ppm;
citrus, dried pulp at 0.60 ppm; pistachio
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.
Thiamethoxam shows toxicological
effects primarily in the liver, kidney,
testes, and hematopoietic system. In
addition, developmental neurological
effects were observed in rats. This
developmental effect is being used to
assess risks associated with acute
exposures to thiamethoxam, and the
liver and testicular effects are the bases
for assessing longer term exposures.
Although thiamethoxam causes liver
tumors in mice, the Agency has
classified thiamethoxam as ‘‘not likely
to be carcinogenic to humans’’ based on
convincing evidence that a nongenotoxic mode of action for liver
tumors was established in the mouse
and that the carcinogenic effects are a
result of a mode of action dependent on
sufficient amounts of a hepatotoxic
metabolite produced persistently. The
non-cancer (chronic) assessment is
sufficiently protective of the key events
(perturbation of liver metabolism,
hepatotoxicity/regenerative
proliferation) in the animal mode of
action for cancer published in the
Federal Register of June 22, 2007 (72 FR
34401 (FRL–8133–6). Thiamethoxam
produces a metabolite known as CGA322704 (referred to in the remainder of
this rule as clothianidin). Clothianidin
is also registered as a pesticide. While
some of the toxic effects observed
following testing with the
thiamethoxam and clothianidin are
similar, the available information
indicates that thiamethoxam and
clothianidin have different toxicological
effects in mammals and should be
assessed separately. A separate risk
assessment of clothianidin has been
completed in conjunction with the
registration of clothianidin. The most
recent assessment, which provides
details regarding the toxicology of
clothianidin are discussed in the final
rule published in the Federal Register
of February 6, 2008 (FRL–8346–9) at
(https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
PEST/2008/February/Day-06/
p1784.htm).
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by thiamethoxam as well
as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies are discussed in the
final rule published in the Federal
Register of June 22, 2007.
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-, intermediate-, 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 thiamethoxam used for
human risk assessment is discussed in
Unit III.B. of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of June 22, 2007.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:13 Apr 07, 2009
Jkt 217001
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to thiamethoxam, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing thiamethoxam tolerances in (40
CFR 180.565). EPA assessed dietary
exposures from thiamethoxam in food
as follows:
For both acute and chronic exposure
assessments for thiamethoxam, EPA
combined residues of clothianidin
coming from thiamethoxam with
residues of thiamethoxam per se. As
discussed in this unit, thiamethoxam’s
major metabolite is CGA-322704, which
is also the registered active ingredient
clothianidin. Available information
indicates that thiamethoxam and
clothianidin have different toxicological
effects in mammals and should be
assessed separately, however, these
exposure assessments for this action
incorporated the total residue of
thiamethoxam and clothianidin from
use of thiamethoxam because the total
residue for each commodity for which
thiamethoxam has a tolerance has not
been separated between thiamethoxam
and its clothianidin metabolite. The
combining of these residues, as was
done in this assessment, results in
highly conservative estimates of dietary
exposure and risk. A separate
assessment was done for clothianidin.
The clothianidin assessment included
clothianidin residues from use of
clothianidin as a pesticide and
clothianidin residues from use of
thiamethoxam on those commodities for
which the pesticide clothianidin does
not have a tolerance. As to these
commodities, EPA has separated total
residues between thiamethoxam and
clothianidin.
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 Intake by
Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels
in food, EPA assumed maximum
residues of thiamethoxam and
clothianidin observed in the
thiamethoxam field trials. It was also
assumed that 100% of crops with
registered or requested uses of
thiamethoxam and 100% of crops with
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
15871
registered or requested uses of
clothianidin are treated.
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 to residue
levels in food, EPA assumed maximum
residues of thiamethoxam and
clothianidin observed in the
thiamethoxam field trials. It was also
assumed that 100% of crops with
registered or requested uses of
thiamethoxam and 100% of crops with
registered or requested uses of
clothianidin are treated.
A complete listing of the inputs used
in these assessments can be found in the
following documents: Thiamethoxam
Acute and Chronic Aggregate Dietary
and Drinking Water Exposure and Risk
Assessments for FIFRA Section 3
Registration on Citrus and Tree Nut
Crops; Clothianidin. Acute and Chronic
Aggregate Dietary (Food and Drinking
Water) Exposure and Risk Assessments
for the Section 3 Registration of
Thiamethoxam on Citrus and Tree Nut
Crop Groups. These documents are
available in the docket EPA–HQ–OPP–
2008–0167, at https:///
www.regulations.gov.
iii. Cancer. A quantitative cancer
exposure assessment is not necessary
because EPA concluded that
thiamethoxam is ‘‘not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans’’ based on
convincing evidence that a nongenotoxic mode of action for liver
tumors was established in the mouse,
and that the carcinogenic effects are a
result of a mode of action dependent on
sufficient amounts of a hepatotoxic
metabolite produced persistently. The
non-cancer (chronic) assessment is
sufficiently protective of the key events
(perturbation of liver metabolism,
hepatotoxicity/regenerative
proliferation) in the animal mode of
action for cancer and thus a separate
exposure assessment pertaining to
cancer risk is not necessary. Because
clothianidin is not expected to pose a
cancer risk, a quantitative dietary
exposure assessment for the purposes of
assessing cancer risk was not
conducted.
iv. Anticipated residue information.
EPA did not use percent crop treated
(PCT) information in the dietary
assessments for thiamethoxam or
clothianidin. Maximum field trial
residues and 100 PCT were assumed for
all food commodities.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA
authorizes EPA to use available data and
information on the anticipated residue
levels of pesticide residues in food and
the actual levels of pesticide residues
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
15872
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
that have been measured in food. If EPA
relies on such information, EPA must
require pursuant to section 408(f)(1) of
FFDCA that data be provided 5 years
after the tolerance is established,
modified, or left in effect, demonstrating
that the levels in food are not above the
levels anticipated. For the present
action, EPA will issue such data Call-Ins
as are required by section 408(b)(2)(E) of
FFDCA and authorized under section
408(f)(1) of FFDCA. Data will be
required to be submitted no later than
5 years from the date of issuance of
these tolerances.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. Thiamethoxam is expected to be
persistent and mobile in terrestrial and
aquatic environments. These fate
properties suggest that thiamethoxam
has a potential to move into surface
water and shallow ground water. The
Agency lacks sufficient monitoring data
to complete a comprehensive dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for thiamethoxam in drinking water.
Because the Agency does not have
comprehensive monitoring data, the
Agency used screening level water
exposure models in the dietary exposure
analysis and risk assessment for
thiamethoxam in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of
thiamethoxam. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening
Concentration in Groundwater (SCIGROW) models, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of
thiamethoxam for acute exposures are
12.26 parts per billion (ppb) for surface
water and 7.94 ppb for ground water.
The EDWCs for chronic exposures for
non-cancer assessments are 1.29 ppb for
surface water and 7.94 ppb for ground
water.
The registrant has conducted smallscale prospective ground water studies
in several locations in the United States
to investigate the mobility of
thiamethoxam in a vulnerable
hydrogeological setting. A review of
those data shows that generally residues
of thiamethoxam, as well as CGA322704, are below the limit of
quantification (0.05 ppb). When
quantifiable residues are found, they are
sporadic and at low levels. The
maximum observed residue levels from
any monitoring well were 1.0 ppb for
thiamethoxam and 0.73 ppb for CGA322704. These values are well below the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:13 Apr 07, 2009
Jkt 217001
modeled estimates summarized in this
unit, indicating that the modeled
estimates are, in fact, protective of what
actual exposures are likely to be.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
both acute and chronic dietary risk
assessments for thiamethoxam, the
upper-bound EDWC value of 12.26 ppb
was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water.
Clothianidin is not a significant
degradate of thiamethoxam in surface or
ground water sources of drinking water.
Clothianidin drinking water residues
only result from uses of clothianidin.
The acute EDWC value of 7.3 ppb for
clothianidin was incorporated into the
acute dietary assessment and the
chronic EDWC value of 5.9 ppb for
clothianidin was incorporated into the
chronic dietary assessment.
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).
Thiamethoxam is currently registered
for the following uses that could result
in residential exposures: Turfgrass on
golf courses, residential lawns,
commercial grounds, parks,
playgrounds, athletic fields, landscapes,
interiorscapes and sod farms. EPA
assessed residential exposure using the
following assumptions:
Thiamethoxam is registered for use on
turfgrass on golf courses, residential
lawns, commercial grounds, parks,
playgrounds, athletic fields, landscapes,
interiorscapes and sod farms.
Thiamethoxam is applied by
commercial applicators only. Therefore,
exposures resulting from homeowner
applications were not assessed.
However, entering areas previously
treated with thiamethoxam could lead
to exposures for adults and children. As
a result, risk assessments have been
completed for postapplication scenarios.
Short-term exposures (1 to 30 days of
continuous exposure) may occur as a
result of activities on treated turf. There
are no use patterns for thiamethoxam
that indicate intermediate-term (1 to 6
months of continuous exposure) or
chronic non-dietary exposures are likely
to occur.
Dermal exposures were assessed for
adults and children. Oral non-dietary
ingestion exposures (i.e. soil ingestion,
and hand-/object-to-mouth) were
assessed for children as well. Since all
postapplication scenarios occur
outdoors the potential for inhalation
exposure is negligible and therefore
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
does not require an inhalation exposure
assessment. For purposes of this
assessment, exposure from residential
lawns is used to represent the worst
case scenario for both dermal and oral
postapplication exposure.
Postapplication dermal exposure
resulting from contact with treated turf
was assessed using the EPA’s Standard
Operating Procedures for Residential
Exposure and a chemical-specific turf
transfer residue study.
Thiamethoxam use on turf does not
result in significant residues of
clothianidin. In addition, clothianidin
residential and aggregate risks are not of
concern. Refer to the final rule
published in the Federal Register of
February 6, 2008 (https://www.epa.gov/
fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2008/February/Day06/p1784.htm).
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.’’
Thiamethoxam is a member of the
neonicotinoid class of pesticides and
produces, as a metabolite, another
neonicotinoid, clothianidin. Structural
similarities or common effects do not
constitute a common mechanism of
toxicity. Evidence is needed to establish
that the chemicals operate by the same,
or essentially the same sequence of
major biochemical events (EPA, 2002).
Although clothianidin and
thiamethoxam bind selectively to insect
nicotinic acetylcholine receptors
(nAChR), the specific binding site(s)/
receptor(s) for clothianidin,
thiamethoxam, and the other
neonicotinoids are unknown at this
time. Additionally, the commonality of
the binding activity itself is uncertain,
as preliminary evidence suggests that
clothianidin operates by direct
competitive inhibition, while
thiamethoxam is a non-competitive
inhibitor. Furthermore, even if future
research shows that neonicotinoids
share a common binding activity to a
specific site on insect nicotinic
acetylcholine receptors, there is not
necessarily a relationship between this
pesticidal action and a mechanism of
toxicity in mammals. Structural
variations between the insect and
mammalian nAChRs produce
quantitative differences in the binding
affinity of the neonicotinoids towards
these receptors, which, in turn, confers
the notably greater selective toxicity of
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
this class towards insects, including
aphids and leafhoppers, compared to
mammals. While the insecticidal action
of the neonicotinoids is neurotoxic, the
most sensitive regulatory endpoint for
thiamethoxam is based on unrelated
effects in mammals, including effects on
the liver, kidney, testes, and
hematopoietic system. Additionally, the
most sensitive toxicological effect in
mammals differs across the
neonicotinoids (e.g., testicular tubular
atrophy with thiamethoxam;
mineralized particles in thyroid colloid
with imidacloprid).
Thus, EPA has not found
thiamethoxam or clothianidin to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances. For the purposes
of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA
has assumed that thiamethoxam and
clothianidin do not have a common
mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding
EPA’s efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism
of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals,
see EPA’s website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(c) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA safety factor (SF). In applying this
provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
In the developmental studies, there is
no evidence of increased quantitative or
qualitative susceptibility of rat or rabbit
fetuses to in utero exposure to
thiamethoxam. The developmental
NOAELs are either higher than or equal
to the maternal NOAELs. The
toxicological effects in fetuses do not
appear to be any more severe than those
in the dams or does. In the rat
developmental neurotoxicity study,
there was no quantitative evidence of
increased susceptibility.
There is evidence of increased
quantitative susceptibility for male pups
in two 2–generation reproductive
studies. In one study, there are no
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:13 Apr 07, 2009
Jkt 217001
toxicological effects in the dams
whereas for the pups, reduced
bodyweights are observed at the highest
dose level, starting on day 14 of
lactation. This contributes to an overall
decrease in bodyweight gain during the
entire lactation period. Additionally,
reproductive effects in males appear in
the F1 generation in the form of
increased incidence and severity of
testicular tubular atrophy. These data
are considered to be evidence of
increased quantitative susceptibility for
male pups (increased incidence of
testicular tubular atrophy at 1.8
milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day)
when compared to the parents (hyaline
changes in renal tubules at 61 mg/kg/
day; NOAEL is 1.8 mg/kg/day).
In a more recent 2–generation
reproduction study, the most sensitive
effect was sperm abnormalities at 3 mg/
kg/day (the NOAEL is 1.2 mg/kg/day) in
the F1 males. This study also indicates
increased susceptibility for the offspring
for this effect.
Although there is evidence of
increased quantitative susceptibility for
male pups in both reproductive studies,
NOAELs and LOAELs were established
in these studies and the Agency selected
the NOAEL for testicular effects in F1
pups as the basis for risk assessment.
The Agency has confidence that the
NOAEL selected for risk assessment is
protective of the most sensitive effect
(testicular effects) for the most sensitive
subgroup (pups) observed in the
toxicological database.
Due to the finding of quantitative
sensitivity in the reproduction studies,
the EPA conducted a degree of concern
analysis to assess the residual
uncertainties for prenatal and/or
postnatal susceptibility. The Agency
concluded that there is low concern for
an increased susceptibility in the young
given:
i. There was no increased sensitivity
(qualitative or quantitative) in the rat
developmental, rabbit developmental
and rat developmental neurotoxicity
studies;
ii. There was a clear NOAEL
identified for the effects in pups in the
rat reproduction studies where
sensitivity was seen; and
iii. The Agency selected this NOAEL
as the basis for risk assessment.
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
thiamethoxam is largely complete,
including acceptable/guideline
developmental toxicity, 2–generation
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
15873
reproduction, and developmental
neurotoxicity studies designed to detect
adverse effects on the developing
organism, which could result from the
mechanism that may have produced the
decreased alanine amino transferase
levels.
The registrant must submit, as a
condition of registration, an
immunotoxicity study. This study is
now required under 40 CFR part 158.
The available data for thiamethoxam
show the potential for immunotoxic
effects, which are described in more
detail below:
a. Subchronic Dog - Leukopenia. In
the subchronic dog study, leukopenia
(decreased white blood cells) was
observed in females only, at the highest
dose tested (HDT) of 50 mg/kg/day; the
NOAEL for this effect was 34 mg/kg/
day. The overall study NOAEL was 9.3
mg/kg/day in females (8.2 mg/kg/day in
males) based on hematology and other
clinical chemistry findings at the
LOAEL of 34 mg/kg/day (32 mg/kg/day
in males).
b. Subchronic Mouse – Spleen weight
changes. In the subchronic mouse
study, decreased spleen weights were
observed in females at 626 mg/kg/day;
the NOAEL for this effect was the next
lowest dose of 231 mg/kg/day. The
overall study NOAEL was 1.4 mg/kg/
day (males) based on increased
hepatocyte hypertrophy observed at the
LOAEL of 14.3 mg/kg/day. The
decreased absolute spleen weights were
considered to be treatment related, but
were not statistically significant at 626
mg/kg/day or at the HDT of 1,163 mg/
kg/day. Since spleen weights were not
decreased relative to body weights, the
absolute decreases may have been
related to the decreases in body weight
gain observed at higher doses.
Overall, the Agency has a low concern
for the potential for immunotoxicity
related to these effects for the following
reasons:
• In general, the Agency does not
consider alterations in hematology
parameters alone to be a significant
indication of potential immunotoxicity.
In the case of thiamethoxam, high-dose
females in the subchronic dog study had
slight microcytic anemia as well as
leukopenia characterized by reductions
in neutrophils, lymphocytes and
monocytes; the leukopenia was
considered to be related to the anemic
response to exposure. Further,
endpoints and doses selected for risk
assessment are protective of the
observed effects on hematology.
• Spleen weight decreases, while
considered treatment-related, were
associated with decreases in body
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
15874
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
weight gain, and were not statistically
significant. In addition, spleen weight
changes occurred only at very high
doses, more than 70 times higher than
the doses selected for risk assessment.
Therefore, an additional 10x safety
factor is not warranted at this time.
ii. For the reasons discussed in Unit
III.D.2., there is low concern for an
increased susceptibility in the young.
iii. Although there is evidence of
neurotoxicity after acute exposure to
thiamethoxam at doses of 500 mg/kg/
day including drooped palpebral
closure, decrease in rectal temperature
and locomotor activity and increase in
forelimb grip strength, no evidence of
neuropathology was observed. These
effects occurred at doses at least
fourteen-fold and 416-fold higher than
the doses used for the acute, and
chronic risk assessments, respectively;
thus, there is low concern for these
effects since it is expected that the doses
used for regulatory purposes would be
protective of the effects noted at much
higher doses.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on assumption
that the maximum residues of
thiamethoxam and clothianidin
observed in the thiamethoxam field
trials were remaining on crops.
Although there is available information
indicating that thiamethoxam and
clothianidin have different toxicological
effects in mammals and should be
assessed separately, the residues of each
have been combined in these
assessments to ensure that the estimated
exposures of thiamethoxam do not
underestimate actual potential
thiamethoxam exposures. An
assumption of 100 PCT was made for all
foods evaluated in the assessments. For
both the acute and chronic assessments
the acute EDWC of 12.26 ppb (0.0123
ppm) was used as a worst-case estimate
of exposure via drinking water.
Compared to the results from smallscale prospective ground water studies
where the maximum observed residue
levels from any monitoring well were
1.0 ppb for thiamethoxam and 0.73 ppb
for CGA-322704, the modeled estimates
are protective of what actual exposures
are likely to be. Similarly conservative
Residential SOPs as well as a chemicalspecific turf transfer residue (TTR)
study were used to assess postapplication exposure to children and
incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by thiamethoxam.
v. The FQPA safety factor for
clothianidin has been retained as a 10x
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:13 Apr 07, 2009
Jkt 217001
UFDB for the lack of a developmental
immunotoxicity study. Refer to the final
rule published in the Federal Register
of February 6, 2008 (https://
www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2008/
February/Day-06/p1784.htm).
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-,
intermediate-, 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. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to
thiamethoxam will occupy 3% of the
aPAD for children 1 to 2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Acute dietary exposure from
food and water to clothianidin is
estimated to occupy 45% of the aPAD
for children 1 to 2 years 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 thiamethoxam
from food and water will utilize 42% of
the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old,
the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Similarly, chronic
exposure to clothianidin from food and
water will occupy 16% of the cPAD for
children 1 to 2 years old. Based on the
explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic
residential exposure to residues of
thiamethoxam and clothianidin is not
expected.
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).
Thiamethoxam 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 food and water and
short-term residential exposures for
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
thiamethoxam. The level of concern for
the margin of exposure (MOE) is 100 for
aggregate short-term exposures (i.e.,
MOEs less than 100 indicate potential
risks of concern). The level of concern
for clothianidin MOEs is 1,000.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
aggregated short-term food, water, and
residential exposures to thiamethoxam
result in MOEs of 730 through 2,800 for
all exposure scenarios for infants,
children and adults. Aggregate MOEs
associated with clothianidin range from
1,100 to 23,000.
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).
Thiamethoxam 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 thiamethoxam or
clothianidin 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. The Agency has classified
thiamethoxam as not likely to be a
human carcinogen based on convincing
evidence that a non-genotoxic mode of
action for liver tumors was established
in the mouse and that the carcinogenic
effects are a result of a mode of action
dependent on sufficient amounts of a
hepatotoxic metabolite produced
persistently. Thiamethoxam is not
expected to pose a cancer risk.
Clothianidin has been classified as a
‘‘not likely to be a human carcinogen.’’
It 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
thiamethoxam or clothianidin residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(high-performance liquid
chromatography/ultraviolet (HPLC/UV)
or mass spectrometry (MS)) 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; email address: residuemethods@epa.gov.
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
15875
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
B. International Residue Limits
There are no CODEX or Mexican
maximum residue limits (MRLs) for
thiamethoxam. A number of Canadian
MRLs exist for this chemical and are in
accord with U.S. tolerances. The new/
revised tolerances established by this
rule have been derived using the
NAFTA Tolerance Harmonization
Spreadsheet.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
Available field trial data support a
tolerance for combined residues of
thiamethoxam and CGA-322704 in/on
citrus (group 10) at 0.40 ppm. Therefore,
the proposed tolerance of 0.30 ppm
should be raised to 0.40 ppm.
The data submitted with the petition
support the proposed tolerance of 0.02
ppm for tree nuts (group 14). However,
because the petitioner is seeking a
tolerance to cover use on pistachios and
pistachios are not, pending a proposed
revision of the tree nut group definition,
included in the tree nut group, a
separate tolerance should be established
for pistachio at 0.02 ppm.
The data supporting the petition
indicate that combined residues of
thiamethoxam and CGA-332704 may
concentrate in dried citrus pulp.
Therefore, a tolerance for citrus, dried
pulp should be established and EPA has
determined that the appropriate level is
0.60 ppm.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for combined residues of thiamethoxam,
[3-[(2-chloro-5thiazolyl)methyl]tetrahydro-5-methyl-Nnitro-4H-1,3,5-oxadiazin-4-imine], and
its metabolite, CGA-322704 [N-(2chloro-thiazol-5-ylmethyl)-N’-methylN’-nitro-guanidine], in or on nut, tree
(crop group 14) at 0.02 ppm; almond,
hulls at 1.2 ppm; fruit, citrus (crop
group 10) at 0.40 ppm; citrus, dried
pulp at 0.60 ppm; pistachio 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,
entitled Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:13 Apr 07, 2009
Jkt 217001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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: March 30, 2009.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting 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 180.565 is amended by
revising the introductory text in
paragraph (a); removing the commodity
‘‘pecan’’ from the table in paragraph (a);
alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table; and removing
paragraph (b) and reserving the heading
to read as follows:
■
§ 180.565 Thiamethoxam; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. A tolerance is established
for the combined residues of the
insecticide thiamethoxam [3-[(2-chloro5-thiazolyl)methyl]tetrahydro-5-methylN -nitro-4 H -1,3,5-oxadiazin-4-imine]
(CAS Reg. No. 153719–23–4) and its
metabolite [N-(2-chloro-thiazol-5ylmethyl) -N ′-methyl- N ′-nitroguanidine], calculated as parent
equivalents, in or on the following raw
agricultural commodities:
Commodity
Parts per million
Almond, hulls ..................
*
*
*
Citrus, dried pulp ............
*
*
*
Fruit, citrus, group 10 .....
*
*
*
Nut, tree, group 14) ........
*
*
*
Pistachio .........................
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
*
*
08APR1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.2 ppm
*
0.60 ppm
*
0.40 ppm
*
0.02 ppm
*
0.02 ppm
*
15876
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E9–7966 Filed 4–7–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
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:
40 CFR Part 180
I. General Information
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0361; FRL–8406–8]
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.
Cyhalofop-butyl; Pesticide Tolerances
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for combined residues of
cyhalofop-butyl, cyhalofop acid and the
di-acid metabolite in or on rice, grain
and rice, wild, grain. Interregional
Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) and
Dow AgroSciences, LLC, requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). This
regulation also removes the expired,
time-limited tolerances for residues of
cyhalofop-butyl, cyhalofop acid and the
di-acid metabolite in or on on rice, grain
and rice, straw.
DATES: This regulation is effective April
8, 2009. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
June 8, 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–2008–0361. 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.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:13 Apr 07, 2009
Jkt 217001
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 e-CFR
cite 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
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2008–0361 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 June 8, 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–2008–0361, 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 Registers of June 4,
2008 (73 FR 31862) (FRL–8365–3) and
August 29, 2008 (73 FR 50963) (FRL–
8379–2), EPA issued notices pursuant to
section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 8E7341) by
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite
201W, Princeton, NJ, 08540; and a
pesticide petition (PP 8F7403) by Dow
AgroSciences, LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd.,
Indianapolis, IN 46268, respectively.
The petitions requested that 40 CFR
180.576 be amended by establishing
tolerances for combined residues of the
herbicide cyhalofop-butyl, R-(+)-nbutyl-2-(4(4-cyano-2-fluorophenoxy)phenoxy)propionate, plus cyhalofop
acid, R-(+)-2-(4(4-cyano-2fluorophenoxy)-phenoxy)propionic
acid) and the di-acid metabolite, (2R)-4[4-(1-carboxyethoxy)phenoxy]-3fluorobenzoic acid, in or on rice, grain
(PP 8F7403) and rice, wild, grain (PP
8E7341) at 0.03 parts per million (ppm);
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 66 (Wednesday, April 8, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15869-15876]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-7966]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0167; FRL-8407-8]
Thiamethoxam; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for combined residues
of thiamethoxam and its metabolite CGA-322704 in or on citrus fruits,
citrus pulp, tree nuts, almond hulls, and pistachios. Syngenta Crop
Protection, Inc., requested these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective April 8, 2009. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before June 8, 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-2008-0167. 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: Julie Chao, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 308-8735; e-mail address: chao.julie@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 electronically available documents at
https://www.regulations.gov, you may access this Federal Register
document electronically through the EPA Internet
[[Page 15870]]
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 e-CFR cite 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-2008-0167 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 June 8, 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-2008-0167, 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., N.W., 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 April 16, 2008 (73 FR 20632) (FRL-8359-
1), 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
7F7293) by Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc., P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro,
NC 27419-8300. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.565 be amended by
establishing tolerances for combined residues of the insecticide
thiamethoxam [3-[(2-chloro-5-thiazolyl)methyl]tetrahydro-5-methyl-N-
nitro-4H-1,3,5-oxadiazin-4-imine] and its metabolite CGA-322704 [N-(2-
chloro-thiazol-5-ylmethyl)-N'-methyl-N'-nitro-guanidine], in or on
fruit, citrus (crop group 10) at 0.3 parts per million (ppm); almond,
nut, tree (crop group 14) including pistachio at 0.02 ppm; and almond
hulls at 1.2 ppm. That notice referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc., 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
determined that the tolerance level for citrus (crop group 10) needs to
be raised, and that separate tolerances need to be established for
pistachios and citrus, dried pulp. 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 thiamethoxam and its metabolite
CGA-322704 on nut, tree (crop group 14) at 0.02 ppm; almond, hulls at
1.2 ppm; fruit, citrus (crop group 10) at 0.40 ppm; citrus, dried pulp
at 0.60 ppm; pistachio 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.
Thiamethoxam shows toxicological effects primarily in the liver,
kidney, testes, and hematopoietic system. In addition, developmental
neurological effects were observed in rats. This developmental effect
is being used to assess risks associated with acute exposures to
thiamethoxam, and the liver and testicular effects are the bases for
assessing longer term exposures. Although thiamethoxam causes liver
tumors in mice, the Agency has classified thiamethoxam as ``not likely
to be carcinogenic to humans'' based on convincing evidence that a non-
genotoxic mode of action for liver tumors was established in the mouse
and that the carcinogenic effects are a result of a mode of action
dependent on sufficient amounts of a hepatotoxic metabolite produced
persistently. The non-cancer (chronic) assessment is sufficiently
protective of the key events (perturbation of liver metabolism,
hepatotoxicity/regenerative proliferation) in the animal mode of action
for cancer published in the Federal Register of June 22, 2007 (72 FR
34401 (FRL-8133-6). Thiamethoxam produces a metabolite known as CGA-
322704 (referred to in the remainder of this rule as clothianidin).
Clothianidin is also registered as a pesticide. While some of the toxic
effects observed following testing with the thiamethoxam and
clothianidin are similar, the available information indicates that
thiamethoxam and clothianidin have different toxicological effects in
mammals and should be assessed separately. A separate risk assessment
of clothianidin has been completed in conjunction with the registration
of clothianidin. The most recent assessment, which provides details
regarding the toxicology of clothianidin are discussed in the final
rule published in the Federal Register of February 6, 2008 (FRL-8346-9)
at (https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-
[[Page 15871]]
PEST/2008/February/Day-06/p1784.htm).
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by thiamethoxam as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in the final rule
published in the Federal Register of June 22, 2007.
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-, intermediate-
, 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 thiamethoxam used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of June 22, 2007.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to thiamethoxam, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing thiamethoxam tolerances in (40
CFR 180.565). EPA assessed dietary exposures from thiamethoxam in food
as follows:
For both acute and chronic exposure assessments for thiamethoxam,
EPA combined residues of clothianidin coming from thiamethoxam with
residues of thiamethoxam per se. As discussed in this unit,
thiamethoxam's major metabolite is CGA-322704, which is also the
registered active ingredient clothianidin. Available information
indicates that thiamethoxam and clothianidin have different
toxicological effects in mammals and should be assessed separately,
however, these exposure assessments for this action incorporated the
total residue of thiamethoxam and clothianidin from use of thiamethoxam
because the total residue for each commodity for which thiamethoxam has
a tolerance has not been separated between thiamethoxam and its
clothianidin metabolite. The combining of these residues, as was done
in this assessment, results in highly conservative estimates of dietary
exposure and risk. A separate assessment was done for clothianidin. The
clothianidin assessment included clothianidin residues from use of
clothianidin as a pesticide and clothianidin residues from use of
thiamethoxam on those commodities for which the pesticide clothianidin
does not have a tolerance. As to these commodities, EPA has separated
total residues between thiamethoxam and clothianidin.
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 Intake by
Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed maximum
residues of thiamethoxam and clothianidin observed in the thiamethoxam
field trials. It was also assumed that 100% of crops with registered or
requested uses of thiamethoxam and 100% of crops with registered or
requested uses of clothianidin are treated.
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 to residue levels in food, EPA assumed maximum
residues of thiamethoxam and clothianidin observed in the thiamethoxam
field trials. It was also assumed that 100% of crops with registered or
requested uses of thiamethoxam and 100% of crops with registered or
requested uses of clothianidin are treated.
A complete listing of the inputs used in these assessments can be
found in the following documents: Thiamethoxam Acute and Chronic
Aggregate Dietary and Drinking Water Exposure and Risk Assessments for
FIFRA Section 3 Registration on Citrus and Tree Nut Crops;
Clothianidin. Acute and Chronic Aggregate Dietary (Food and Drinking
Water) Exposure and Risk Assessments for the Section 3 Registration of
Thiamethoxam on Citrus and Tree Nut Crop Groups. These documents are
available in the docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0167, at https:///
www.regulations.gov.
iii. Cancer. A quantitative cancer exposure assessment is not
necessary because EPA concluded that thiamethoxam is ``not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans'' based on convincing evidence that a non-
genotoxic mode of action for liver tumors was established in the mouse,
and that the carcinogenic effects are a result of a mode of action
dependent on sufficient amounts of a hepatotoxic metabolite produced
persistently. The non-cancer (chronic) assessment is sufficiently
protective of the key events (perturbation of liver metabolism,
hepatotoxicity/regenerative proliferation) in the animal mode of action
for cancer and thus a separate exposure assessment pertaining to cancer
risk is not necessary. Because clothianidin is not expected to pose a
cancer risk, a quantitative dietary exposure assessment for the
purposes of assessing cancer risk was not conducted.
iv. Anticipated residue information. EPA did not use percent crop
treated (PCT) information in the dietary assessments for thiamethoxam
or clothianidin. Maximum field trial residues and 100 PCT were assumed
for all food commodities.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data
and information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues
in food and the actual levels of pesticide residues
[[Page 15872]]
that have been measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA
must require pursuant to section 408(f)(1) of FFDCA that data be
provided 5 years after the tolerance is established, modified, or left
in effect, demonstrating that the levels in food are not above the
levels anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such data
Call-Ins as are required by section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA and
authorized under section 408(f)(1) of FFDCA. Data will be required to
be submitted no later than 5 years from the date of issuance of these
tolerances.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. Thiamethoxam is expected
to be persistent and mobile in terrestrial and aquatic environments.
These fate properties suggest that thiamethoxam has a potential to move
into surface water and shallow ground water. The Agency lacks
sufficient monitoring data to complete a comprehensive dietary exposure
analysis and risk assessment for thiamethoxam in drinking water.
Because the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data, the
Agency used screening level water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment for thiamethoxam in drinking
water. These simulation models take into account data on the physical,
chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of thiamethoxam. Further
information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Groundwater (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
thiamethoxam for acute exposures are 12.26 parts per billion (ppb) for
surface water and 7.94 ppb for ground water. The EDWCs for chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments are 1.29 ppb for surface water and
7.94 ppb for ground water.
The registrant has conducted small-scale prospective ground water
studies in several locations in the United States to investigate the
mobility of thiamethoxam in a vulnerable hydrogeological setting. A
review of those data shows that generally residues of thiamethoxam, as
well as CGA-322704, are below the limit of quantification (0.05 ppb).
When quantifiable residues are found, they are sporadic and at low
levels. The maximum observed residue levels from any monitoring well
were 1.0 ppb for thiamethoxam and 0.73 ppb for CGA-322704. These values
are well below the modeled estimates summarized in this unit,
indicating that the modeled estimates are, in fact, protective of what
actual exposures are likely to be.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For both acute and chronic
dietary risk assessments for thiamethoxam, the upper-bound EDWC value
of 12.26 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.
Clothianidin is not a significant degradate of thiamethoxam in
surface or ground water sources of drinking water. Clothianidin
drinking water residues only result from uses of clothianidin. The
acute EDWC value of 7.3 ppb for clothianidin was incorporated into the
acute dietary assessment and the chronic EDWC value of 5.9 ppb for
clothianidin was incorporated into the chronic dietary assessment.
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).
Thiamethoxam is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: Turfgrass on golf courses,
residential lawns, commercial grounds, parks, playgrounds, athletic
fields, landscapes, interiorscapes and sod farms. EPA assessed
residential exposure using the following assumptions:
Thiamethoxam is registered for use on turfgrass on golf courses,
residential lawns, commercial grounds, parks, playgrounds, athletic
fields, landscapes, interiorscapes and sod farms. Thiamethoxam is
applied by commercial applicators only. Therefore, exposures resulting
from homeowner applications were not assessed. However, entering areas
previously treated with thiamethoxam could lead to exposures for adults
and children. As a result, risk assessments have been completed for
postapplication scenarios. Short-term exposures (1 to 30 days of
continuous exposure) may occur as a result of activities on treated
turf. There are no use patterns for thiamethoxam that indicate
intermediate-term (1 to 6 months of continuous exposure) or chronic
non-dietary exposures are likely to occur.
Dermal exposures were assessed for adults and children. Oral non-
dietary ingestion exposures (i.e. soil ingestion, and hand-/object-to-
mouth) were assessed for children as well. Since all postapplication
scenarios occur outdoors the potential for inhalation exposure is
negligible and therefore does not require an inhalation exposure
assessment. For purposes of this assessment, exposure from residential
lawns is used to represent the worst case scenario for both dermal and
oral postapplication exposure.
Postapplication dermal exposure resulting from contact with treated
turf was assessed using the EPA's Standard Operating Procedures for
Residential Exposure and a chemical-specific turf transfer residue
study.
Thiamethoxam use on turf does not result in significant residues of
clothianidin. In addition, clothianidin residential and aggregate risks
are not of concern. Refer to the final rule published in the Federal
Register of February 6, 2008 (https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2008/February/Day-06/p1784.htm).
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.''
Thiamethoxam is a member of the neonicotinoid class of pesticides
and produces, as a metabolite, another neonicotinoid, clothianidin.
Structural similarities or common effects do not constitute a common
mechanism of toxicity. Evidence is needed to establish that the
chemicals operate by the same, or essentially the same sequence of
major biochemical events (EPA, 2002). Although clothianidin and
thiamethoxam bind selectively to insect nicotinic acetylcholine
receptors (nAChR), the specific binding site(s)/receptor(s) for
clothianidin, thiamethoxam, and the other neonicotinoids are unknown at
this time. Additionally, the commonality of the binding activity itself
is uncertain, as preliminary evidence suggests that clothianidin
operates by direct competitive inhibition, while thiamethoxam is a non-
competitive inhibitor. Furthermore, even if future research shows that
neonicotinoids share a common binding activity to a specific site on
insect nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, there is not necessarily a
relationship between this pesticidal action and a mechanism of toxicity
in mammals. Structural variations between the insect and mammalian
nAChRs produce quantitative differences in the binding affinity of the
neonicotinoids towards these receptors, which, in turn, confers the
notably greater selective toxicity of
[[Page 15873]]
this class towards insects, including aphids and leafhoppers, compared
to mammals. While the insecticidal action of the neonicotinoids is
neurotoxic, the most sensitive regulatory endpoint for thiamethoxam is
based on unrelated effects in mammals, including effects on the liver,
kidney, testes, and hematopoietic system. Additionally, the most
sensitive toxicological effect in mammals differs across the
neonicotinoids (e.g., testicular tubular atrophy with thiamethoxam;
mineralized particles in thyroid colloid with imidacloprid).
Thus, EPA has not found thiamethoxam or clothianidin to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
thiamethoxam and clothianidin do not have a common mechanism of
toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts
to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to
evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(c) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA safety
factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. In the developmental
studies, there is no evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative
susceptibility of rat or rabbit fetuses to in utero exposure to
thiamethoxam. The developmental NOAELs are either higher than or equal
to the maternal NOAELs. The toxicological effects in fetuses do not
appear to be any more severe than those in the dams or does. In the rat
developmental neurotoxicity study, there was no quantitative evidence
of increased susceptibility.
There is evidence of increased quantitative susceptibility for male
pups in two 2-generation reproductive studies. In one study, there are
no toxicological effects in the dams whereas for the pups, reduced
bodyweights are observed at the highest dose level, starting on day 14
of lactation. This contributes to an overall decrease in bodyweight
gain during the entire lactation period. Additionally, reproductive
effects in males appear in the F1 generation in the form of increased
incidence and severity of testicular tubular atrophy. These data are
considered to be evidence of increased quantitative susceptibility for
male pups (increased incidence of testicular tubular atrophy at 1.8
milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) when compared to the parents
(hyaline changes in renal tubules at 61 mg/kg/ day; NOAEL is 1.8 mg/kg/
day).
In a more recent 2-generation reproduction study, the most
sensitive effect was sperm abnormalities at 3 mg/kg/day (the NOAEL is
1.2 mg/kg/day) in the F1 males. This study also indicates increased
susceptibility for the offspring for this effect.
Although there is evidence of increased quantitative susceptibility
for male pups in both reproductive studies, NOAELs and LOAELs were
established in these studies and the Agency selected the NOAEL for
testicular effects in F1 pups as the basis for risk assessment. The
Agency has confidence that the NOAEL selected for risk assessment is
protective of the most sensitive effect (testicular effects) for the
most sensitive subgroup (pups) observed in the toxicological database.
Due to the finding of quantitative sensitivity in the reproduction
studies, the EPA conducted a degree of concern analysis to assess the
residual uncertainties for prenatal and/or postnatal susceptibility.
The Agency concluded that there is low concern for an increased
susceptibility in the young given:
i. There was no increased sensitivity (qualitative or quantitative)
in the rat developmental, rabbit developmental and rat developmental
neurotoxicity studies;
ii. There was a clear NOAEL identified for the effects in pups in
the rat reproduction studies where sensitivity was seen; and
iii. The Agency selected this NOAEL as the basis for risk
assessment.
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 thiamethoxam is largely complete,
including acceptable/guideline developmental toxicity, 2-generation
reproduction, and developmental neurotoxicity studies designed to
detect adverse effects on the developing organism, which could result
from the mechanism that may have produced the decreased alanine amino
transferase levels.
The registrant must submit, as a condition of registration, an
immunotoxicity study. This study is now required under 40 CFR part 158.
The available data for thiamethoxam show the potential for immunotoxic
effects, which are described in more detail below:
a. Subchronic Dog - Leukopenia. In the subchronic dog study,
leukopenia (decreased white blood cells) was observed in females only,
at the highest dose tested (HDT) of 50 mg/kg/day; the NOAEL for this
effect was 34 mg/kg/day. The overall study NOAEL was 9.3 mg/kg/day in
females (8.2 mg/kg/day in males) based on hematology and other clinical
chemistry findings at the LOAEL of 34 mg/kg/day (32 mg/kg/day in
males).
b. Subchronic Mouse - Spleen weight changes. In the subchronic
mouse study, decreased spleen weights were observed in females at 626
mg/kg/day; the NOAEL for this effect was the next lowest dose of 231
mg/kg/day. The overall study NOAEL was 1.4 mg/kg/day (males) based on
increased hepatocyte hypertrophy observed at the LOAEL of 14.3 mg/kg/
day. The decreased absolute spleen weights were considered to be
treatment related, but were not statistically significant at 626 mg/kg/
day or at the HDT of 1,163 mg/kg/day. Since spleen weights were not
decreased relative to body weights, the absolute decreases may have
been related to the decreases in body weight gain observed at higher
doses.
Overall, the Agency has a low concern for the potential for
immunotoxicity related to these effects for the following reasons:
In general, the Agency does not consider alterations in
hematology parameters alone to be a significant indication of potential
immunotoxicity. In the case of thiamethoxam, high-dose females in the
subchronic dog study had slight microcytic anemia as well as leukopenia
characterized by reductions in neutrophils, lymphocytes and monocytes;
the leukopenia was considered to be related to the anemic response to
exposure. Further, endpoints and doses selected for risk assessment are
protective of the observed effects on hematology.
Spleen weight decreases, while considered treatment-
related, were associated with decreases in body
[[Page 15874]]
weight gain, and were not statistically significant. In addition,
spleen weight changes occurred only at very high doses, more than 70
times higher than the doses selected for risk assessment.
Therefore, an additional 10x safety factor is not warranted at this
time.
ii. For the reasons discussed in Unit III.D.2., there is low
concern for an increased susceptibility in the young.
iii. Although there is evidence of neurotoxicity after acute
exposure to thiamethoxam at doses of 500 mg/kg/day including drooped
palpebral closure, decrease in rectal temperature and locomotor
activity and increase in forelimb grip strength, no evidence of
neuropathology was observed. These effects occurred at doses at least
fourteen-fold and 416-fold higher than the doses used for the acute,
and chronic risk assessments, respectively; thus, there is low concern
for these effects since it is expected that the doses used for
regulatory purposes would be protective of the effects noted at much
higher doses.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on assumption that the maximum residues of thiamethoxam and
clothianidin observed in the thiamethoxam field trials were remaining
on crops. Although there is available information indicating that
thiamethoxam and clothianidin have different toxicological effects in
mammals and should be assessed separately, the residues of each have
been combined in these assessments to ensure that the estimated
exposures of thiamethoxam do not underestimate actual potential
thiamethoxam exposures. An assumption of 100 PCT was made for all foods
evaluated in the assessments. For both the acute and chronic
assessments the acute EDWC of 12.26 ppb (0.0123 ppm) was used as a
worst-case estimate of exposure via drinking water. Compared to the
results from small-scale prospective ground water studies where the
maximum observed residue levels from any monitoring well were 1.0 ppb
for thiamethoxam and 0.73 ppb for CGA-322704, the modeled estimates are
protective of what actual exposures are likely to be. Similarly
conservative Residential SOPs as well as a chemical-specific turf
transfer residue (TTR) study were used to assess post-application
exposure to children and incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
thiamethoxam.
v. The FQPA safety factor for clothianidin has been retained as a
10x UFDB for the lack of a developmental immunotoxicity study. Refer to
the final rule published in the Federal Register of February 6, 2008
(https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2008/February/Day-06/p1784.htm).
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-, intermediate-, 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. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to thiamethoxam will occupy 3% of the aPAD for children 1 to 2 years
old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure. Acute
dietary exposure from food and water to clothianidin is estimated to
occupy 45% of the aPAD for children 1 to 2 years 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
thiamethoxam from food and water will utilize 42% of the cPAD for
children 1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Similarly, chronic exposure to clothianidin from food and
water will occupy 16% of the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old. Based
on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of thiamethoxam and
clothianidin is not expected.
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).
Thiamethoxam 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 food and water and short-term
residential exposures for thiamethoxam. The level of concern for the
margin of exposure (MOE) is 100 for aggregate short-term exposures
(i.e., MOEs less than 100 indicate potential risks of concern). The
level of concern for clothianidin MOEs is 1,000.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the aggregated short-term food,
water, and residential exposures to thiamethoxam result in MOEs of 730
through 2,800 for all exposure scenarios for infants, children and
adults. Aggregate MOEs associated with clothianidin range from 1,100 to
23,000.
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).
Thiamethoxam 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 thiamethoxam or clothianidin 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. The Agency has
classified thiamethoxam as not likely to be a human carcinogen based on
convincing evidence that a non-genotoxic mode of action for liver
tumors was established in the mouse and that the carcinogenic effects
are a result of a mode of action dependent on sufficient amounts of a
hepatotoxic metabolite produced persistently. Thiamethoxam is not
expected to pose a cancer risk. Clothianidin has been classified as a
``not likely to be a human carcinogen.'' It 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 thiamethoxam or clothianidin residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (high-performance liquid
chromatography/ultraviolet (HPLC/UV) or mass spectrometry (MS)) 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.
[[Page 15875]]
B. International Residue Limits
There are no CODEX or Mexican maximum residue limits (MRLs) for
thiamethoxam. A number of Canadian MRLs exist for this chemical and are
in accord with U.S. tolerances. The new/revised tolerances established
by this rule have been derived using the NAFTA Tolerance Harmonization
Spreadsheet.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
Available field trial data support a tolerance for combined
residues of thiamethoxam and CGA-322704 in/on citrus (group 10) at 0.40
ppm. Therefore, the proposed tolerance of 0.30 ppm should be raised to
0.40 ppm.
The data submitted with the petition support the proposed tolerance
of 0.02 ppm for tree nuts (group 14). However, because the petitioner
is seeking a tolerance to cover use on pistachios and pistachios are
not, pending a proposed revision of the tree nut group definition,
included in the tree nut group, a separate tolerance should be
established for pistachio at 0.02 ppm.
The data supporting the petition indicate that combined residues of
thiamethoxam and CGA-332704 may concentrate in dried citrus pulp.
Therefore, a tolerance for citrus, dried pulp should be established and
EPA has determined that the appropriate level is 0.60 ppm.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for combined residues of
thiamethoxam, [3-[(2-chloro-5-thiazolyl)methyl]tetrahydro-5-methyl-N-
nitro-4H-1,3,5-oxadiazin-4-imine], and its metabolite, CGA-322704 [N-
(2-chloro-thiazol-5-ylmethyl)-N'-methyl-N'-nitro-guanidine], in or on
nut, tree (crop group 14) at 0.02 ppm; almond, hulls at 1.2 ppm; fruit,
citrus (crop group 10) at 0.40 ppm; citrus, dried pulp at 0.60 ppm;
pistachio 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, 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: March 30, 2009.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting 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 180.565 is amended by revising the introductory text in
paragraph (a); removing the commodity ``pecan'' from the table in
paragraph (a); alphabetically adding the following commodities to the
table; and removing paragraph (b) and reserving the heading to read as
follows:
Sec. 180.565 Thiamethoxam; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. A tolerance is established for the combined residues
of the insecticide thiamethoxam [3-[(2-chloro-5-
thiazolyl)methyl]tetrahydro-5-methyl- N -nitro-4 H -1,3,5-oxadiazin-4-
imine] (CAS Reg. No. 153719-23-4) and its metabolite [N-(2-chloro-
thiazol-5-ylmethyl) -N '-methyl- N '-nitro-guanidine], calculated as
parent equivalents, in or on the following raw agricultural
commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almond, hulls........................................ 1.2 ppm
* * * * *
Citrus, dried pulp................................... 0.60 ppm
* * * * *
Fruit, citrus, group 10.............................. 0.40 ppm
* * * * *
Nut, tree, group 14)................................. 0.02 ppm
* * * * *
Pistachio............................................ 0.02 ppm
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[[Page 15876]]
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-7966 Filed 4-7-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S