Sodium monoalkyl and dialkyl (C6, 37598-37605 [E9-17957]
Download as PDF
37598
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Inert Ingredients
Limits
*
*
*
Sodium N-oleoyl-N-methyl taurine (CAS Reg. No. 137–20–2)
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E9–17960 Filed 7–28–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0665; FRL–8421–7]
Sodium monoalkyl and dialkyl (C6-C16)
phenoxybenzenedisulfonates and
related acids; Exemption from the
Requirement of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of Sodium
monoalkyl and dialkyl (C6-C16)
phenoxybenzenedisulfonates and
related acids, often known as the
‘‘alkyldiphenyl oxide sulfnates’’, herein
referred to in this document as ADPOS,
when used as inert ingredients at a
maximum of 20% by weight in pesticide
formulations for pre-harvest and postharvest use under 40 CFR 180.910, as
well as for application to animals under
40 CFR 180.930. Dow AgroSciences,
LLC, submitted a petition to EPA under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA), requesting an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance.
This regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of ADPOS.
DATES: This regulation is effective July
29, 2009. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
September 28, 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–2008–0665. 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
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:13 Jul 28, 2009
Jkt 217001
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Surfactants, related adjuvants of surfactants
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:
Kerry Leifer, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 308–8811; e-mail address:
leifer.kerry@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
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Uses
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2008–0665 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 September 28, 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–2008–0665, 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.
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
II. Background
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
In the Federal Register of October 8,
2008 (73 FR 58962) (FRL–8383-7), 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 8E7372) by Dow
AgroSciences, LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd.,
Indianapolis, IN 46268. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.910 and 40
CFR 180.930 be amended by
establishing exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues
of the inert ingredient ADPOS at a
maximum of 20% by weight in pesticide
formulations. That notice referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by
Dow AgroSciences, LLC, the petitioner,
which is available to the public in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
The Agency received only one
comment in response to the notice of
filing. One comment was received from
a private citizen who opposed the
authorization to sell any pesticide that
leaves a residue on food. The Agency
understands the commenter’s concerns
and recognizes that some individuals
believe that no residue of pesticides
should be allowed. However, under the
existing legal framework provided by
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), EPA is
authorized to establish pesticide
tolerances or exemptions where persons
seeking such tolerances or exemptions
have demonstrated that the pesticide
meets the safety standard imposed by
that statute.
This petition was submitted in
response to a final rule of August 9,
2006, (71 FR 45415) (FRL–8084–1) in
which the Agency revoked, under
section 408(e)(1) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), the
existing exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues
of certain inert ingredients because of
insufficient data to make the
determination of safety required by
FFDCA section 408(b)(2). The expiration
date for the tolerance exemptions
subject to revocation was August 9,
2008, which was later extended to
August 9, 2009 (73 FR 45312) to allow
for data to be submitted to support the
establishment of tolerance exemptions
for these inert ingredients prior to the
effective date of the tolerance exemption
revocation.
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients
that are not active ingredients as defined
in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are
not limited to, the following types of
ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own):
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:13 Jul 28, 2009
Jkt 217001
Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as
polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and
diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose;
wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol
dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ‘‘inert’’ is not
intended to imply nontoxicity; the
ingredient may or may not be
chemically active. Generally, EPA has
exempted inert ingredients from the
requirement of a tolerance based on the
low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue.’’
EPA performs a number of analyses to
determine the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide residues. First,
EPA determines the toxicity of
pesticides. Second, EPA examines
exposure to the pesticide through food,
drinking water, and through other
exposures that occur as a result of
pesticide use in residential settings.
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
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of ADPOS when
used as inert ingredients at a maximum
of 20% by weight in pesticide
formulations for pre-harvest and post-
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
37599
harvest use, as well as for application to
animals. EPA’s assessment of exposures
and risks associated with establishing
tolerances follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
The available mammalian toxicology
database includes acute, subchronic
repeat dose oral, reproductive/
developmental screening tests, chronic
rat and dog studies and mutagenicity
data for four representative compounds
of the C6 to C16 ADPOS group. The
Agency concluded that the four
surrogate chemicals (CAS Reg. Nos.
147732–60–3, 39354–74–0, 119345–04–
9 (alternate CAS Reg. No. 28519–02–0),
and 70191-76-3) are representative of all
the chemicals in the ADPOS cluster.
Additionally, the Agency concluded
that the currently available toxicity
dataset is adequate to apply to the
ADPOS inerts and to characterize these
surfactants. Further, the Agency noted
that there was sufficient bracketing of
the range of molecular weights expected
from the inerts in this grouping.
The ADPOS inerts are not acutely
toxic by the oral, dermal, and inhalation
routes of exposure, and are moderately
irritating to the skin and eyes.
Respiratory irritation is possible with
mists. The ADPOS inerts, like all
surfactants, are surface-active materials
that can damage the structural integrity
of cellular membranes at high dose
levels. Thus, surfactants are often
corrosive and irritating in concentrated
solutions, as indicated by the acute
toxicity studies for these inert materials.
It is possible that some of the observed
toxicity seen in the repeated studies,
such as diarrhea, gastrointestinal tract
effects or decreased body weight gain,
can be attributed to the corrosive and
irritating nature of these surfactants.
The liver and possibly kidney appear to
be the primary target organs. Following
subchronic exposures to ADPOS inerts,
the most sensitive effects include
increased liver enzymes (alanine and
aspartate aminotransferase), increased
prothrombin time and soft/decreased
feces in males and significant decreases
in body weight gain in both sexes after
47–54 days of dosing at doses between
28 and 92 mg/kg/day. In comparison, in
most of the other studies, no effects
were observed in the range of 100 to 500
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
37600
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
mg/kg/day, even following chronic
exposures. There is some evidence of
neurotoxicity in a 28–day rat study,
including high-stepping gait, ataxia and
salivation; however, these effects are
seen at the highest dose tested (HDT).
The Agency considered these effects to
be the result of a high dose rather than
a neurotoxic condition. No quantitative
or qualitative increased susceptibility
was demonstrated in the offspring in the
two reproductive/developmental
toxicity studies in rats following in
utero and postnatal exposure. In one
OPPTS Harmonized Guideline 870.3650
study there were no developmental
effects at the HDT in the presence of
maternal toxicity such as increased liver
enzymes and prothrombin time. In a
second OPPTS Harmonized Guideline
870.3650 study with test substance
(CAS Reg. No. 147732–60–3) the
developmental effects were manifested
as statistically significantly decrease in
body weight and clinical signs at 1,000
mg/kg which was in the presence severe
maternal toxicity which manifested as
mortality, clinical signs, and decrease in
body weight were observed.
There is no evidence that the ADPOS
inerts are mutagenic, but there is some
evidence of potential clastogenicity for
a C6 inert formulation. In vitro data for
genotoxicity are available for the range
of alkyl chains of the lower (C6) and
upper (C16) compounds in this group.
The Ames tests were negative for the C6
and C16 inerts. The C16 analogue was
negative in the CHO/HGPRT forward
mutation assay. In chromosomal
aberration tests that evaluate
clastogenicity, C6 (CAS Reg. No.
147732–60–3) was clastogenic in human
lymphocytes in the absence of metabolic
activation (S9), but was negative in rat
lymphocytes. The registrants attributed
this positive response to peroxide as an
unwanted constituent, and no longer
use peroxide in the ADPOS process. C16
was negative in both human and rat
lymphocytes, although the human
lymphocyte study was not acceptable.
In vivo, there was no evidence of a
cytogenetic response in rat bone marrow
cells for C16 (CAS Reg. No. 70191–76–
3) in an unacceptable study that lacked
positive controls, which limits the
confidence of this finding. Based on
these studies and the overall weight of
the evidence, the Agency concluded
that the ADPOS inerts are not likely to
be mutagenic. There is no evidence of
carcinogenicity in the chronic/
carcinogenicity rat study at does up to
500 mg/kg/day. In addition, no tumors
were observed in the two year toxicity
study in dogs. Based on the negative
response for carcinogenicity in the
carcinogenicity study in rats and two
year dog study, negative response for
mutagenicity, lack of any alerts in
model predictions, and SAR analysis,
the Agency concluded that the ADPOS
inerts are not likely to be carcinogenic.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by ADPOS as well as the
no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document
‘‘Alkyl Diphenyl Oxide Sulfonates (JITF
CST 18 Inert Ingredients). Human
Health Risk Assessment to Support
Proposed Exemption from the
Requirement of a Tolerance When Used
as Inert Ingredients in Pesticide
Formulations’’ pages 9-15 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0665.
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 ADPOS used for human
health risk assessment is shown in the
Table of this unit.
TABLE —SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR ADPOS FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Point of Departure and Uncertainty/Safety Factors
Exposure Scenerio
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
Acute Dietary
(General Population, including Infants and Children)
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:13 Jul 28, 2009
NOAEL=115
grams/day
UFA=10x
UFH=10x
FQPA SF=1x
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
milligrams/ kilo(mg/kg/day)
Frm 00106
Fmt 4700
RfD, PAD, LOC for Risk
Assesment
Acute RfD=1.15 mg/kg/day
aPAD=1.15 mg/kg/day
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
Study and Toxicological Effects
28-day oral toxicity study- rats
(CAS No. 70191-76-3)
LOAEL= 367 mg/kg/day, based
on Post-dosing salivation (day
1 post-dose in 3/5 male and 2/
5 female rats; 2-28 all rats.)
29JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
37601
TABLE —SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR ADPOS FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT—Continued
Point of Departure and Uncertainty/Safety Factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for Risk
Assesment
Chronic Dietary
(all populations)
NOAEL=28 mg/kg/day UFA=10x
UFH=10x
FQPA SF=1x
Chronic RfD=0.28 mg/kg/day
cPAD=0.28 mg/kg/day
Reproductive/developmentalrat(CAS No. 70191-76-3)
LOAEL= 92 mg/kg/day, based on
increasted ALT and AST in females, increased prothrombin
time and soft/decrease feces in
males and significant decreased feces in males and
significant decreased in body
weight gain in both sexes after
47-54 days of dosing.
Short-Term
(1-30 days Incidental Oral/Dermal/
Inhalation)
NOAEL=115 mg/kg/day UFA=10x
UFH=10x
FQPA SF=1x
Residential/Occupational LOC for
MOE=100
28-day
oral
toxicity
studyrats(CAS No. 70191-76-3)
LOAEL= 367 mg/kg/day, based
on ost-dosing salvation (day 1
post-dose in 3/5 male and 2/5
female rats; days 2-28 all rats).
Intermediate and Long-Term (1-6
months/≤6months
Incidental Oral/Dermal/Inhalation
NOAEL=28 mg/kg/day UFA=10x
UFH=10x
FQPA SF=1x
Residential/Occupational LOC for
MOE= 100
Reproductive/developmentalrat(CAS No. 70191-76-3)
LOAEL= 92 mg/kg/day, based on
increasted ALT and AST in females, increased prothrombin
time and soft/decreased feces
in males and significant decreased feces in males and
significant decreased in body
weight gain in both sexes after
47-54 days of dosing.
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation)
Classification: no edivence of carcinogenicity in available studies
Exposure Scenerio
Study and Toxicological Effects
1The LOAEL of 367 mg/kg/day was used from MRID 46989217 and NOAEL of 115 mg/kg/day was used from MRID 46989216 due to artifact
of dose selection. Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is derived from observed dose-response data and used to
mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally relevant human exposures. NOAEL = no observed
adverse effect level. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). PAD = population adjusted dose (a=acute,
c=chronic). FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. RfD = reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern. N/A = not applicable.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to ADPOS, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
exemptions from the requirement of a
tolerance. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from ADPOS in food as
follows:
i. Acute and chronic exposure. In
conducting the acute and chronic
dietary exposure assessments, 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, no residue data
were submitted for the ADPOS inert
ingredients. In the absence of specific
residue data, EPA has developed an
approach which uses surrogate
information to derive upper bound
exposure estimates for the subject inert
ingredients. Upper bound exposure
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:13 Jul 28, 2009
Jkt 217001
estimates are based on the highest
tolerance for a given commodity from a
list of high-use insecticides, herbicides,
and fungicides. A complete description
of the general approach taken to assess
inert ingredient risks in the absence of
residue data is contained in the
memorandum entitled ‘‘Alkyl Amines
Polyalkoxylates (Cluster 4): Acute and
Chronic Aggregate (Food and Drinking
Water) Dietary Exposure and Risk
Assessments for the Inerts.’’ (D361707,
S. Piper, 2/25/09) and can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0738.
In the dietary exposure assessment,
the Agency assumed that the residue
level of the inert ingredient would be no
higher than the highest tolerance for a
given commodity. Implicit in this
assumption is that there would be
similar rates of degradation (if any)
between the active and inert ingredient
and that the concentration of inert
ingredient in the scenarios leading to
these highest of tolerances would be no
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
higher than the concentration of the
active ingredient.
The Agency believes the assumptions
used to estimate dietary exposures lead
to an extremely conservative assessment
of dietary risk due to a series of
compounded conservatisms. First,
assuming that the level of residue for an
inert ingredient is equal to the level of
residue for the active ingredient will
overstate exposure. The concentrations
of active ingredient in agricultural
products is generally at least 50 percent
of the product and often can be much
higher. Further, pesticide products
rarely have a single inert ingredient;
rather there is generally a combination
of different inert ingredients used which
additionally reduces the concentration
of any single inert ingredient in the
pesticide product in relation to that of
the active ingredient. In the case of
ADPOS, EPA made a specific
adjustment to the dietary exposure
assessment to account for the use
limitations of the amount of ADPOS that
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
37602
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
may be in formulations (no more than
20% by weight) and assumed that the
ADPOS are present at the maximum
limitations rather than at equal
quantities with the active ingredient.
This remains a very conservative
assumption because surfactants are
generally used at levels far below this
percentage.
Second, the conservatism of this
methodology is compounded by EPA’s
decision to assume that, for each
commodity, the active ingredient which
will serve as a guide to the potential
level of inert ingredient residues is the
active ingredient with the highest
tolerance level. This assumption
overstates residue values because it
would be highly unlikely, given the
high number of inert ingredients, that a
single inert ingredient or class of
ingredients would be present at the
level of the active ingredient in the
highest tolerance for every commodity.
Finally, a third compounding
conservatism is EPA’s assumption that
all foods contain the inert ingredient at
the highest tolerance level. In other
words, EPA assumed 100 percent of all
foods are treated with the inert
ingredient at the rate and manner
necessary to produce the highest residue
legally possible for an active ingredient.
In summary, EPA chose a very
conservative method for estimating
what level of inert residue could be on
food, then used this methodology to
choose the highest possible residue that
could be found on food and assumed
that all food contained this residue. No
consideration was given to potential
degradation between harvest and
consumption even though monitoring
data shows that tolerance level residues
are typically one to two orders of
magnitude higher than actual residues
in food when distributed in commerce.
Accordingly, although sufficient
information to quantify actual residue
levels in food is not available, the
compounding of these conservative
assumptions will lead to a significant
exaggeration of actual exposures. EPA
does not believe that this approach
underestimates exposure in the absence
of residue data.
ii. Cancer. The Agency used a
qualitative structure activity
relationship (SAR) database, DEREK11,
to determine if there were structural
alerts suggestive of carcinogenicity. No
structural alerts for carcinogenicity were
identified. There is no evidence of
carcinogenicity in the chronic/
carcinogenicity study in rats at doe up
to 500 mg/kg/day. In addition, no
tumors were observed in the two year
toxicity study in dogs. Based on the
negative response of the carcinogenicity
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:13 Jul 28, 2009
Jkt 217001
study in rats and two year dog study,
negative response for mutagenicity, lack
of any alerts in model predictions, and
SAR analysis, the Agency concluded
that the ADPOS inerts are not likely to
be carcinogenic. Since the Agency has
not identified any concerns for
carcinogenicity relating to the ADPOS
inerts, a cancer dietary exposure
assessment was not performed.
iii. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did
not use anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for ADPOS. Tolerance level residues
and/or 100 PCT were assumed for all
food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for ADPOS in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of ADPOS.
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.
A screening level drinking water
analysis, based on the Pesticide Root
Zone Model /Exposure Analysis
Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS) was
performed to calculate the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)
of ADPOS. Modeling runs on four
surrogate inert ingredients using a range
of physical chemical properties that
would bracket those of the ADPOS were
conducted. Modeled acute drinking
water values ranged from 0.001 parts
per billion (ppb) to 41 ppb. Modeled
chronic drinking water values ranged
from 0.0002 ppb to 19 ppb. Further
details of this drinking water analysis
can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document
‘‘Alkyl Diphenyl Oxide Sulfonates (JITF
CST 18 Inert Ingredients). Human
Health Risk Assessment to Support
Proposed Exemption from the
Requirement of a Tolerance When Used
as Inert Ingredients in Pesticide
Formulations’’ pages 16 and 71-73 in
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–
0665.
For the purpose of the screening level
dietary risk assessment to support this
request for an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for ADPOS,
a conservative drinking water
concentration value of 100 ppb based on
screening level modeling was used to
assess the contribution to drinking
water for both the acute and chronic
dietary risk assessments. These values
were directly entered into the dietary
exposure model.
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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). ADPOS
may be used in inert ingredients in
pesticide products that are registered for
specific uses that may result in both
indoor and outdoor residential
exposures. A screening level residential
exposure and risk assessment was
completed for products containing
ADPOS as inert ingredients. In this
assessment, representative scenarios,
based on end-use product application
methods and labeled application rates,
were selected.The ADPOS inerts are not
added to any insecticidal products
intended for pet use and are not likely
to be used in personal care products.
The Agency conducted an assessment to
represent worst-case residential
exposure by assessing ADPOS in
pesticide formulations (outdoor
scenarios) and ADPOS in disinfectant
type uses (indoor scenarios). Based on
information contained in the petition,
the ADPOS inerts can be present in
consumer cleaning products. Therefore,
the Agency assessed the disinfectanttype products containing ADPOS using
several anti-microbial scenarios to
represent worst-case residential handler
exposure. Standard methodologies
based on the Agency’s Residential SOPs
were used to assess residential post
application exposure to hard surfance
cleaners.
Further details of this residential
exposure and risk analysis can be found
at https://www.regulations.gov in ‘‘Alkyl
Diphenyl Oxide Sulfonates (JITF CST 18
Inert Ingredients). Human Health Risk
Assessment to Support Proposed
Exemption from the Requirement of a
Tolerance When Used as Inert
Ingredients in Pesticide Formulations’’
pages 20-28 and 94-110 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0665.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found ADPOS to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and ADPOS do
not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has assumed that ADPOS
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
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.
The toxicity database consists of two rat
reproductive/developmental screening
studies. There was no increased
susceptibility to the offspring of rats
following in utero or postnatal exposure
in the two reproductive/developmental
toxicity screening tests, In one study,
there were no adverse effects to
offspring, while decreased pup body
weight and clinical signs were noted in
the presence of maternal/parental
toxicity at the limit dose of 1,000 mg/
kg/day in a second study.
There are no neurotoxicity studies
available for the ADPOS, however, there
is some evidence of neurotoxicity in a
subchronic rat study at 367 mg inert/kg/
day (1,000 mg product/kg/day),
including high-stepping gait, ataxia and
salivation. However, since the effects
noted occurred at doses significantly
higher than the current points of
departure for risk assessment, additional
neurotoxicity data is not required.
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 ADPOS is
considered adequate for assessing the
risks to infants and children (the
available studies are described in Unit
iv.D.2.
ii. There is some evidence of
neurotoxicity in a 28–day rat study,
including high-stepping gait, ataxia and
salivation; however, these effects are
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:13 Jul 28, 2009
Jkt 217001
seen at the HDT. Since these effects
occurred at dose levels significantly
higher than the current points of
departure used for regulation, the
Agency determined that the points of
departure selected for this risk
assessment are protective of any
neurotoxicity effects. Therefore,
additional neurotoxicity data and other
toxicity data are not required.
iii. No quantitative or qualitative
increased susceptibility was
demonstrated in the offspring in the two
reproductive/developmental toxicity
studies in rats following in utero and
postnatal exposure.
iv. The Agency has concluded that an
additional UF for extrapolation from
subchronic toxicity study to a chronic
exposure scenario would not be needed
since toxicity is not expected to increase
with a longer duration of exposure for
the ADPOS inerts. This is because for
the most sensitive endpoint,
prothrombin time (PT), the clotting
factor proteins evaluated by the PT test
have short plasma half-lives, ranging
from 4 hours for factor VII to a
maximum of 96 hours for fibrinogen.
The clotting factors are being
continually synthesized by the liver and
by 47 days of exposure would have
reached steady state and further
exposure is not expected to result in any
further increase in prothrombin time.
Therefore, the Agency concluded that
the 10X interspecies and 10X
intraspecies UF would be adequately
protective.
v. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The food and drinking water assessment
is not likely to underestimate exposure
to any subpopulation, including those
comprised of infants and children. The
food exposure assessments are
considered to be highly conservative as
they are based on the use of the highest
tolerance level from the surrogate
pesticides for every food and 100 PCT
is assumed for all crops. EPA also made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to ADPOS in
drinking water. EPA used similarly
conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure of children as well
as incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by ADPOS.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
37603
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.
In conducting this aggregate risk
assessment, the Agency has
incorporated the petitioner’s requested
use limitations of ADPOS as inert
ingredients in pesticide product
formulations into its exposure
assessment. Specifically, the petition
includes a use limitation of ADPOS at
not more than 20% by weight in
pesticide formulations.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account exposure
estimates from acute dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. Using the exposure assumptions
discussed in this unit for acute
exposure, and the use limitations of not
more than 20% by weight in pesticide
formulations, the acute dietary exposure
from food and water to ADPOS at the
95th percentile for food and drinking
water is 20% of the aPAD for the U.S.
population and 55% of the aPAD for
children 1-2 yrs old, the population
group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. A chronic aggregate
risk assessment takes into account
exposure estimates from chronic dietary
consumption of food and drinking water
using the exposure assumptions
discussed in this unit for chronic
exposure, and the use limitations of not
more than 20% by weight in pesticide
formulations, the chronic dietary
exposure from food and water to
ADPOS is 28% of the cPAD for the U.S.
population and 90% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 yrs old, the most highly
exposed population subgroup.
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).
ADPOS inerts are used as inert
ingredients in pesticide products that
are currently registered for uses that
could result in short-term residential
exposure and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with short-term residential
exposures to ADPOS. Using the
exposure assumptions described in this
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
37604
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
unit, EPA has concluded the combined
short-term food, water, and residential
exposures aggregated result in aggregate
MOEs of 490 and 530, for adult males
and females respectively, for a
combined high end dermal and
inhalation handler exposure with a high
end post application dermal exposure
and an aggregate MOE of 380 for
children for a combined dermal
exposure with hand-to-mouth exposure.
As the level of concern is for MOEs that
are lower than 100, these MOEs are not
of concern.
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).
ADPOS inerts are used as inert
ingredients in pesticide products that
are currently registered for uses that
could result in intermediate -term
residential exposure and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with intermediate-term
residential exposures to ADPOS.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit, EPA has
concluded the combined intermediateterm food, water, and residential
exposures aggregated result in aggregate
MOEs of 320 and 400, for adult males
and females respectively, and an
aggregate MOE of 100 for children. As
the level of concern is for MOEs that are
lower than 100, these MOEs are not of
concern.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. The Agency has not
identified any concerns for
carcinogenicity relating to the ADPOS
inerts.
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 residues of
ADPOS.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
An analytical method is not required
for enforcement purposes since the
Agency is establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance
without any numerical limitation.
B. International Residue Limits
The Agency is not aware of any
country requiring a tolerance for ADPOS
nor have any CODEX Maximum Residue
Levels been established for any food
crops at this time.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:13 Jul 28, 2009
Jkt 217001
VI. Conclusion
Therefore, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance is established
for residues of sodium monoalkyl and
dialkyl (C6-C16)
phenoxybenzenedisulfonates and
related acids, when used as inert
ingredients at a maximum of 20% by
weight in pesticide formulations
applied to crops pre-harvest and postharvest, or to animals.
VII. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this final rule. In addition, this final
rule does not impose any enforceable
duty or contain any unfunded mandate
as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (Public Law 104–4).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VIII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report to each House of
the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. This final rule is not
a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: July 21, 2009.
G. Jeffrey Herndon,
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. In §180.910, the table is amended
by adding alphabetically the following
inert ingredients to read as follows:
■
§ 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and
post-harvest; exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance.
*
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
*
*
29JYR1
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Inert Ingredients
Limits
*
Sodium monoalkyl and dialkyl (C6-C16)
phenoxy benzenedisulfonates and related
acids (CAS Reg. Nos. 147732-59-0,
147732-60-3, 169662-22-0, 70191-75-2,
36445-71-3,
39354-74-0,
70146-13-3,
119345-03-8, 149119-20-0, 149119-19-7,
119345-04-9,
28519-02-0,
25167-32-2,
30260-73-2, 65143-89-7, 70191-76-3)
*
3. In §180.930, the table is amended
by adding alphabetically the following
inert ingredients to read as follows:
■
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E9–17957 Filed 7–28–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0710; FRL–8425–7]
Ethylene oxide adducts of 2,4,7,9tetramethyl-5-decynediol, the ethylene
oxide content averages 3.5, 10, or 30
moles; Exemption from the
Requirement of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
*
*
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of ethylene oxide
adducts of 2,4,7,9-tetramethyl-5decynediol, the ethylene oxide content
averages 3.5, 10, or 30 moles, herein
referred to in this document as
ethoxylated acetylenic diols, when used
as inert ingredients in pesticide
formulations for pre-harvest and postharvest uses under 40 CFR 180.910, as
well as for application to animals under
40 CFR 180.930. The Joint Inerts Task
Force (JITF), Cluster Support Team
Number 19, submitted a petition to EPA
under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting an
Uses
*
*
*
*
Not to exceed 20% in pesticide formulations
*
Jkt 217001
*
Limits
*
Sodium monoalkyl and dialkyl (C6-C16)
phenoxy benzenedisulfonates and related
acids (CAS Reg. Nos. 147732-59-0,
147732-60-3, 169662-22-0, 70191-75-2,
36445-71-3,
39354-74-0,
70146-13-3,
119345-03-8, 149119-20-0, 149119-19-7,
119345-04-9,
28519-02-0,
25167-32-2,
30260-73-2, 65143-89-7, 70191-76-3)
22:13 Jul 28, 2009
*
Surfactants, related adjuvants of surfactants
§ 180.930 Inert ingredients applied to
animals; exemptions from the requirement
of a tolerance.
Inert Ingredients
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Uses
*
*
*
*
Not to exceed 20% in pesticide formulations
*
37605
*
*
*
*
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance. This regulation eliminates the
need to establish a maximum
permissible level for residues of the
ethoxylated acetylenic diols.
DATES: This regulation is effective July
29, 2009. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
September 28, 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–2008–0710. 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00111
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Surfactants, related adjuvants of surfactants
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket
Facility telephone number is (703) 305–
5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kerry Leifer, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 308–8811; e-mail address:
leifer.kerry@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
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 29, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37598-37605]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17957]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0665; FRL-8421-7]
Sodium monoalkyl and dialkyl (C6-C16)
phenoxybenzenedisulfonates and related acids; Exemption from the
Requirement of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of Sodium monoalkyl and dialkyl
(C6-C16) phenoxybenzenedisulfonates and related
acids, often known as the ``alkyldiphenyl oxide sulfnates'', herein
referred to in this document as ADPOS, when used as inert ingredients
at a maximum of 20% by weight in pesticide formulations for pre-harvest
and post-harvest use under 40 CFR 180.910, as well as for application
to animals under 40 CFR 180.930. Dow AgroSciences, LLC, submitted a
petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
requesting an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of ADPOS.
DATES: This regulation is effective July 29, 2009. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before September 28, 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-2008-0665. 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: Kerry Leifer, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 308-8811; e-mail address: leifer.kerry@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 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-2008-0665 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 September 28, 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-2008-0665, 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.
[[Page 37599]]
II. Background
In the Federal Register of October 8, 2008 (73 FR 58962) (FRL-8383-
7), 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
8E7372) by Dow AgroSciences, LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd., Indianapolis, IN
46268. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.910 and 40 CFR 180.930 be
amended by establishing exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance
for residues of the inert ingredient ADPOS at a maximum of 20% by
weight in pesticide formulations. That notice referenced a summary of
the petition prepared by Dow AgroSciences, LLC, the petitioner, which
is available to the public in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
The Agency received only one comment in response to the notice of
filing. One comment was received from a private citizen who opposed the
authorization to sell any pesticide that leaves a residue on food. The
Agency understands the commenter's concerns and recognizes that some
individuals believe that no residue of pesticides should be allowed.
However, under the existing legal framework provided by section 408 of
the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), EPA is authorized to
establish pesticide tolerances or exemptions where persons seeking such
tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that the pesticide meets the
safety standard imposed by that statute.
This petition was submitted in response to a final rule of August
9, 2006, (71 FR 45415) (FRL-8084-1) in which the Agency revoked, under
section 408(e)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
the existing exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of certain inert ingredients because of insufficient data to
make the determination of safety required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2).
The expiration date for the tolerance exemptions subject to revocation
was August 9, 2008, which was later extended to August 9, 2009 (73 FR
45312) to allow for data to be submitted to support the establishment
of tolerance exemptions for these inert ingredients prior to the
effective date of the tolerance exemption revocation.
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue.''
EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the
toxicity of pesticides. Second, EPA examines exposure to the pesticide
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings.
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
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of ADPOS
when used as inert ingredients at a maximum of 20% by weight in
pesticide formulations for pre-harvest and post-harvest use, as well as
for application to animals. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks
associated with establishing tolerances follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
The available mammalian toxicology database includes acute,
subchronic repeat dose oral, reproductive/developmental screening
tests, chronic rat and dog studies and mutagenicity data for four
representative compounds of the C6 to C16 ADPOS
group. The Agency concluded that the four surrogate chemicals (CAS Reg.
Nos. 147732-60-3, 39354-74-0, 119345-04-9 (alternate CAS Reg. No.
28519-02-0), and 70191-76-3) are representative of all the chemicals in
the ADPOS cluster. Additionally, the Agency concluded that the
currently available toxicity dataset is adequate to apply to the ADPOS
inerts and to characterize these surfactants. Further, the Agency noted
that there was sufficient bracketing of the range of molecular weights
expected from the inerts in this grouping.
The ADPOS inerts are not acutely toxic by the oral, dermal, and
inhalation routes of exposure, and are moderately irritating to the
skin and eyes. Respiratory irritation is possible with mists. The ADPOS
inerts, like all surfactants, are surface-active materials that can
damage the structural integrity of cellular membranes at high dose
levels. Thus, surfactants are often corrosive and irritating in
concentrated solutions, as indicated by the acute toxicity studies for
these inert materials. It is possible that some of the observed
toxicity seen in the repeated studies, such as diarrhea,
gastrointestinal tract effects or decreased body weight gain, can be
attributed to the corrosive and irritating nature of these surfactants.
The liver and possibly kidney appear to be the primary target organs.
Following subchronic exposures to ADPOS inerts, the most sensitive
effects include increased liver enzymes (alanine and aspartate
aminotransferase), increased prothrombin time and soft/decreased feces
in males and significant decreases in body weight gain in both sexes
after 47-54 days of dosing at doses between 28 and 92 mg/kg/day. In
comparison, in most of the other studies, no effects were observed in
the range of 100 to 500
[[Page 37600]]
mg/kg/day, even following chronic exposures. There is some evidence of
neurotoxicity in a 28-day rat study, including high-stepping gait,
ataxia and salivation; however, these effects are seen at the highest
dose tested (HDT). The Agency considered these effects to be the result
of a high dose rather than a neurotoxic condition. No quantitative or
qualitative increased susceptibility was demonstrated in the offspring
in the two reproductive/developmental toxicity studies in rats
following in utero and postnatal exposure. In one OPPTS Harmonized
Guideline 870.3650 study there were no developmental effects at the HDT
in the presence of maternal toxicity such as increased liver enzymes
and prothrombin time. In a second OPPTS Harmonized Guideline 870.3650
study with test substance (CAS Reg. No. 147732-60-3) the developmental
effects were manifested as statistically significantly decrease in body
weight and clinical signs at 1,000 mg/kg which was in the presence
severe maternal toxicity which manifested as mortality, clinical signs,
and decrease in body weight were observed.
There is no evidence that the ADPOS inerts are mutagenic, but
there is some evidence of potential clastogenicity for a C6
inert formulation. In vitro data for genotoxicity are available for the
range of alkyl chains of the lower (C6) and upper
(C16) compounds in this group. The Ames tests were negative
for the C6 and C16 inerts. The C16
analogue was negative in the CHO/HGPRT forward mutation assay. In
chromosomal aberration tests that evaluate clastogenicity,
C6 (CAS Reg. No. 147732-60-3) was clastogenic in human
lymphocytes in the absence of metabolic activation (S9), but was
negative in rat lymphocytes. The registrants attributed this positive
response to peroxide as an unwanted constituent, and no longer use
peroxide in the ADPOS process. C16 was negative in both
human and rat lymphocytes, although the human lymphocyte study was not
acceptable. In vivo, there was no evidence of a cytogenetic response in
rat bone marrow cells for C16 (CAS Reg. No. 70191-76-3) in
an unacceptable study that lacked positive controls, which limits the
confidence of this finding. Based on these studies and the overall
weight of the evidence, the Agency concluded that the ADPOS inerts are
not likely to be mutagenic. There is no evidence of carcinogenicity in
the chronic/carcinogenicity rat study at does up to 500 mg/kg/day. In
addition, no tumors were observed in the two year toxicity study in
dogs. Based on the negative response for carcinogenicity in the
carcinogenicity study in rats and two year dog study, negative response
for mutagenicity, lack of any alerts in model predictions, and SAR
analysis, the Agency concluded that the ADPOS inerts are not likely to
be carcinogenic.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by ADPOS as well as the no-observed-adverse-
effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level
(LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document ``Alkyl Diphenyl Oxide Sulfonates (JITF
CST 18 Inert Ingredients). Human Health Risk Assessment to Support
Proposed Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance When Used as
Inert Ingredients in Pesticide Formulations'' pages 9-15 in docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0665.
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 ADPOS used for human
health risk assessment is shown in the Table of this unit.
Table --Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for ADPOS for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of Departure and
Exposure Scenerio Uncertainty/Safety RfD, PAD, LOC for Risk Study and Toxicological
Factors Assesment Effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute Dietary NOAEL=115 milligrams/ Acute RfD=1.15 mg/kg/ 28-day oral toxicity
(General Population, including kilograms/day (mg/kg/ day study- rats (CAS No.
Infants and Children). day) UFA=10x aPAD=1.15 mg/kg/day.... 70191-76-3)
UFH=10x................ LOAEL= 367 mg/kg/day,
FQPA SF=1x............. based on Post-dosing
salivation (day 1 post-
dose in 3/5 male and 2/
5 female rats; 2-28
all rats.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 37601]]
Chronic Dietary NOAEL=28 mg/kg/day Chronic RfD=0.28 mg/kg/ Reproductive/
(all populations).................... UFA=10x day developmental- rat(CAS
UFH=10x................ cPAD=0.28 mg/kg/day.... No. 70191-76-3)
FQPA SF=1x............. LOAEL= 92 mg/kg/day,
based on increasted
ALT and AST in
females, increased
prothrombin time and
soft/decrease feces in
males and significant
decreased feces in
males and significant
decreased in body
weight gain in both
sexes after 47-54 days
of dosing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short-Term NOAEL=115 mg/kg/day Residential/ 28-day oral toxicity
(1-30 days Incidental Oral/Dermal/ UFA=10x Occupational LOC for study- rats(CAS No.
Inhalation). UFH=10x................ MOE=100 70191-76-3)
FQPA SF=1x............. LOAEL= 367 mg/kg/day,
based on ost-dosing
salvation (day 1 post-
dose in 3/5 male and 2/
5 female rats; days 2-
28 all rats).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intermediate and Long-Term (1-6 NOAEL=28 mg/kg/day Residential/ Reproductive/
months/>6months UFA=10x Occupational LOC for developmental- rat(CAS
Incidental Oral/Dermal/Inhalation.... UFH=10x................ MOE= 100 No. 70191-76-3)
FQPA SF=1x............. LOAEL= 92 mg/kg/day,
based on increasted
ALT and AST in
females, increased
prothrombin time and
soft/decreased feces
in males and
significant decreased
feces in males and
significant decreased
in body weight gain in
both sexes after 47-54
days of dosing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: no
edivence of
carcinogenicity in
available studies
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1The LOAEL of 367 mg/kg/day was used from MRID 46989217 and NOAEL of 115 mg/kg/day was used from MRID 46989216
due to artifact of dose selection. Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is
derived from observed dose-response data and used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk
associated with lower environmentally relevant human exposures. NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level.
LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to
human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population
(intraspecies). PAD = population adjusted dose (a=acute, c=chronic). FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. RfD =
reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern. N/A = not applicable.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to ADPOS, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for
exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from ADPOS in food as follows:
i. Acute and chronic exposure. In conducting the acute and chronic
dietary exposure assessments, 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, no residue data were submitted
for the ADPOS inert ingredients. In the absence of specific residue
data, EPA has developed an approach which uses surrogate information to
derive upper bound exposure estimates for the subject inert
ingredients. Upper bound exposure estimates are based on the highest
tolerance for a given commodity from a list of high-use insecticides,
herbicides, and fungicides. A complete description of the general
approach taken to assess inert ingredient risks in the absence of
residue data is contained in the memorandum entitled ``Alkyl Amines
Polyalkoxylates (Cluster 4): Acute and Chronic Aggregate (Food and
Drinking Water) Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessments for the Inerts.''
(D361707, S. Piper, 2/25/09) and can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0738.
In the dietary exposure assessment, the Agency assumed that the
residue level of the inert ingredient would be no higher than the
highest tolerance for a given commodity. Implicit in this assumption is
that there would be similar rates of degradation (if any) between the
active and inert ingredient and that the concentration of inert
ingredient in the scenarios leading to these highest of tolerances
would be no higher than the concentration of the active ingredient.
The Agency believes the assumptions used to estimate dietary
exposures lead to an extremely conservative assessment of dietary risk
due to a series of compounded conservatisms. First, assuming that the
level of residue for an inert ingredient is equal to the level of
residue for the active ingredient will overstate exposure. The
concentrations of active ingredient in agricultural products is
generally at least 50 percent of the product and often can be much
higher. Further, pesticide products rarely have a single inert
ingredient; rather there is generally a combination of different inert
ingredients used which additionally reduces the concentration of any
single inert ingredient in the pesticide product in relation to that of
the active ingredient. In the case of ADPOS, EPA made a specific
adjustment to the dietary exposure assessment to account for the use
limitations of the amount of ADPOS that
[[Page 37602]]
may be in formulations (no more than 20% by weight) and assumed that
the ADPOS are present at the maximum limitations rather than at equal
quantities with the active ingredient. This remains a very conservative
assumption because surfactants are generally used at levels far below
this percentage.
Second, the conservatism of this methodology is compounded by EPA's
decision to assume that, for each commodity, the active ingredient
which will serve as a guide to the potential level of inert ingredient
residues is the active ingredient with the highest tolerance level.
This assumption overstates residue values because it would be highly
unlikely, given the high number of inert ingredients, that a single
inert ingredient or class of ingredients would be present at the level
of the active ingredient in the highest tolerance for every commodity.
Finally, a third compounding conservatism is EPA's assumption that all
foods contain the inert ingredient at the highest tolerance level. In
other words, EPA assumed 100 percent of all foods are treated with the
inert ingredient at the rate and manner necessary to produce the
highest residue legally possible for an active ingredient. In summary,
EPA chose a very conservative method for estimating what level of inert
residue could be on food, then used this methodology to choose the
highest possible residue that could be found on food and assumed that
all food contained this residue. No consideration was given to
potential degradation between harvest and consumption even though
monitoring data shows that tolerance level residues are typically one
to two orders of magnitude higher than actual residues in food when
distributed in commerce.
Accordingly, although sufficient information to quantify actual
residue levels in food is not available, the compounding of these
conservative assumptions will lead to a significant exaggeration of
actual exposures. EPA does not believe that this approach
underestimates exposure in the absence of residue data.
ii. Cancer. The Agency used a qualitative structure activity
relationship (SAR) database, DEREK11, to determine if there were
structural alerts suggestive of carcinogenicity. No structural alerts
for carcinogenicity were identified. There is no evidence of
carcinogenicity in the chronic/carcinogenicity study in rats at doe up
to 500 mg/kg/day. In addition, no tumors were observed in the two year
toxicity study in dogs. Based on the negative response of the
carcinogenicity study in rats and two year dog study, negative response
for mutagenicity, lack of any alerts in model predictions, and SAR
analysis, the Agency concluded that the ADPOS inerts are not likely to
be carcinogenic. Since the Agency has not identified any concerns for
carcinogenicity relating to the ADPOS inerts, a cancer dietary exposure
assessment was not performed.
iii. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT)
information. EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information
in the dietary assessment for ADPOS. Tolerance level residues and/or
100 PCT were assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for ADPOS in drinking water. These simulation models take
into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of ADPOS. 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.
A screening level drinking water analysis, based on the Pesticide
Root Zone Model /Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS) was
performed to calculate the estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) of ADPOS. Modeling runs on four surrogate inert ingredients
using a range of physical chemical properties that would bracket those
of the ADPOS were conducted. Modeled acute drinking water values ranged
from 0.001 parts per billion (ppb) to 41 ppb. Modeled chronic drinking
water values ranged from 0.0002 ppb to 19 ppb. Further details of this
drinking water analysis can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in
document ``Alkyl Diphenyl Oxide Sulfonates (JITF CST 18 Inert
Ingredients). Human Health Risk Assessment to Support Proposed
Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance When Used as Inert
Ingredients in Pesticide Formulations'' pages 16 and 71-73 in docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0665.
For the purpose of the screening level dietary risk assessment to
support this request for an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for ADPOS, a conservative drinking water concentration value
of 100 ppb based on screening level modeling was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water for both the acute and chronic dietary
risk assessments. These values were directly entered into the dietary
exposure model.
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). ADPOS may be used in
inert ingredients in pesticide products that are registered for
specific uses that may result in both indoor and outdoor residential
exposures. A screening level residential exposure and risk assessment
was completed for products containing ADPOS as inert ingredients. In
this assessment, representative scenarios, based on end-use product
application methods and labeled application rates, were selected.The
ADPOS inerts are not added to any insecticidal products intended for
pet use and are not likely to be used in personal care products. The
Agency conducted an assessment to represent worst-case residential
exposure by assessing ADPOS in pesticide formulations (outdoor
scenarios) and ADPOS in disinfectant type uses (indoor scenarios).
Based on information contained in the petition, the ADPOS inerts can be
present in consumer cleaning products. Therefore, the Agency assessed
the disinfectant-type products containing ADPOS using several anti-
microbial scenarios to represent worst-case residential handler
exposure. Standard methodologies based on the Agency's Residential SOPs
were used to assess residential post application exposure to hard
surfance cleaners.
Further details of this residential exposure and risk analysis can
be found at https://www.regulations.gov in ``Alkyl Diphenyl Oxide
Sulfonates (JITF CST 18 Inert Ingredients). Human Health Risk
Assessment to Support Proposed Exemption from the Requirement of a
Tolerance When Used as Inert Ingredients in Pesticide Formulations''
pages 20-28 and 94-110 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0665.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found ADPOS to share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and ADPOS do not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that ADPOS
[[Page 37603]]
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. The toxicity database
consists of two rat reproductive/developmental screening studies. There
was no increased susceptibility to the offspring of rats following in
utero or postnatal exposure in the two reproductive/developmental
toxicity screening tests, In one study, there were no adverse effects
to offspring, while decreased pup body weight and clinical signs were
noted in the presence of maternal/parental toxicity at the limit dose
of 1,000 mg/kg/day in a second study.
There are no neurotoxicity studies available for the ADPOS,
however, there is some evidence of neurotoxicity in a subchronic rat
study at 367 mg inert/kg/day (1,000 mg product/kg/day), including high-
stepping gait, ataxia and salivation. However, since the effects noted
occurred at doses significantly higher than the current points of
departure for risk assessment, additional neurotoxicity data is not
required.
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 ADPOS is considered adequate for
assessing the risks to infants and children (the available studies are
described in Unit iv.D.2.
ii. There is some evidence of neurotoxicity in a 28-day rat study,
including high-stepping gait, ataxia and salivation; however, these
effects are seen at the HDT. Since these effects occurred at dose
levels significantly higher than the current points of departure used
for regulation, the Agency determined that the points of departure
selected for this risk assessment are protective of any neurotoxicity
effects. Therefore, additional neurotoxicity data and other toxicity
data are not required.
iii. No quantitative or qualitative increased susceptibility was
demonstrated in the offspring in the two reproductive/developmental
toxicity studies in rats following in utero and postnatal exposure.
iv. The Agency has concluded that an additional UF for
extrapolation from subchronic toxicity study to a chronic exposure
scenario would not be needed since toxicity is not expected to increase
with a longer duration of exposure for the ADPOS inerts. This is
because for the most sensitive endpoint, prothrombin time (PT), the
clotting factor proteins evaluated by the PT test have short plasma
half-lives, ranging from 4 hours for factor VII to a maximum of 96
hours for fibrinogen. The clotting factors are being continually
synthesized by the liver and by 47 days of exposure would have reached
steady state and further exposure is not expected to result in any
further increase in prothrombin time. Therefore, the Agency concluded
that the 10X interspecies and 10X intraspecies UF would be adequately
protective.
v. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The food and drinking water assessment is not likely to
underestimate exposure to any subpopulation, including those comprised
of infants and children. The food exposure assessments are considered
to be highly conservative as they are based on the use of the highest
tolerance level from the surrogate pesticides for every food and 100
PCT is assumed for all crops. EPA also made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used to assess
exposure to ADPOS in drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative
assumptions to assess post-application exposure of children as well as
incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks posed by ADPOS.
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.
In conducting this aggregate risk assessment, the Agency has
incorporated the petitioner's requested use limitations of ADPOS as
inert ingredients in pesticide product formulations into its exposure
assessment. Specifically, the petition includes a use limitation of
ADPOS at not more than 20% by weight in pesticide formulations.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account exposure estimates from acute dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit
for acute exposure, and the use limitations of not more than 20% by
weight in pesticide formulations, the acute dietary exposure from food
and water to ADPOS at the 95th percentile for food and drinking water
is 20% of the aPAD for the U.S. population and 55% of the aPAD for
children 1-2 yrs old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
2. Chronic risk. A chronic aggregate risk assessment takes into
account exposure estimates from chronic dietary consumption of food and
drinking water using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit
for chronic exposure, and the use limitations of not more than 20% by
weight in pesticide formulations, the chronic dietary exposure from
food and water to ADPOS is 28% of the cPAD for the U.S. population and
90% of the cPAD for children 1-2 yrs old, the most highly exposed
population subgroup.
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).
ADPOS inerts are used as inert ingredients in pesticide products
that are currently registered for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure and the Agency has determined that it is
appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with
short-term residential exposures to ADPOS. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this
[[Page 37604]]
unit, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures aggregated result in aggregate MOEs of 490 and
530, for adult males and females respectively, for a combined high end
dermal and inhalation handler exposure with a high end post application
dermal exposure and an aggregate MOE of 380 for children for a combined
dermal exposure with hand-to-mouth exposure. As the level of concern is
for MOEs that are lower than 100, these MOEs are not of concern.
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).
ADPOS inerts are used as inert ingredients in pesticide products
that are currently registered for uses that could result in
intermediate -term residential exposure and the Agency has determined
that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and
water with intermediate-term residential exposures to ADPOS.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit, EPA has
concluded the combined intermediate-term food, water, and residential
exposures aggregated result in aggregate MOEs of 320 and 400, for adult
males and females respectively, and an aggregate MOE of 100 for
children. As the level of concern is for MOEs that are lower than 100,
these MOEs are not of concern.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. The Agency has not
identified any concerns for carcinogenicity relating to the ADPOS
inerts.
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 residues of ADPOS.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation.
B. International Residue Limits
The Agency is not aware of any country requiring a tolerance for
ADPOS nor have any CODEX Maximum Residue Levels been established for
any food crops at this time.
VI. Conclusion
Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established for residues of sodium monoalkyl and dialkyl
(C6-C16) phenoxybenzenedisulfonates and related
acids, when used as inert ingredients at a maximum of 20% by weight in
pesticide formulations applied to crops pre-harvest and post-harvest,
or to animals.
VII. 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).
VIII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal
Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 21, 2009.
G. Jeffrey Herndon,
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. In Sec. 180.910, the table is amended by adding alphabetically the
following inert ingredients to read as follows:
Sec. 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance.
* * * * *
[[Page 37605]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inert Ingredients Limits Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Sodium monoalkyl and dialkyl (C6- Not to exceed 20% Surfactants,
C16) phenoxy in pesticide related adjuvants
benzenedisulfonates and related formulations of surfactants
acids (CAS Reg. Nos. 147732-59-
0, 147732-60-3, 169662-22-0,
70191-75-2, 36445-71-3, 39354-
74-0, 70146-13-3, 119345-03-8,
149119-20-0, 149119-19-7,
119345-04-9, 28519-02-0, 25167-
32-2, 30260-73-2, 65143-89-7,
70191-76-3)
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. In Sec. 180.930, the table is amended by adding alphabetically the
following inert ingredients to read as follows:
Sec. 180.930 Inert ingredients applied to animals; exemptions from
the requirement of a tolerance.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inert Ingredients Limits Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Sodium monoalkyl and dialkyl (C6- Not to exceed 20% Surfactants,
C16) phenoxy in pesticide related adjuvants
benzenedisulfonates and related formulations of surfactants
acids (CAS Reg. Nos. 147732-59-
0, 147732-60-3, 169662-22-0,
70191-75-2, 36445-71-3, 39354-
74-0, 70146-13-3, 119345-03-8,
149119-20-0, 149119-19-7,
119345-04-9, 28519-02-0, 25167-
32-2, 30260-73-2, 65143-89-7,
70191-76-3)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E9-17957 Filed 7-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S