Triticonazole; Pesticide Tolerances, 4284-4288 [2010-1614]
Download as PDF
4284
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Commodity
Grass forage, fodder, and
hay crop group 17,
straw ............................
*
*
*
*
*
*
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
4.0 number: (703) 308-8050; e-mail address:
*
Maignan.Tawanda@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Parts per million
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2010–1610 Filed 1–26–10; 8:45 am]
I. General Information
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0276; FRL–8808–6]
Triticonazole; Pesticide Tolerances
hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of triticonazole
in or on grain, cereal, group 15, except
rice, and grain, cereal, forage, fodder
and straw, group 16, except rice. BASF
Corporation requested these tolerances
under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
January 27, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before March 29, 2010, 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–2009–0276. 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:
Tawanda Maignan, Registration
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:37 Jan 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
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 Get Electronic Access to
Other Related Information?
You may 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.
To access the OPPTS harmonized test
guidelines referenced in this document
electronically, please go to https://
www.epa.gov/oppts and select ‘‘Test
Methods & Guidelines’’ on the left-side
navigation menu.
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–2009–0276 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 March 29, 2010.
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–2009–0276, by one of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001.
• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket
Facility’s normal hours of operation
(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket Facility telephone number is
(703) 305–5805.
II. Petition for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of August 19,
2009, (74 FR 41900) (FRL–8426–7), 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 8F7420) by BASF
Corporation, P.O. Box 13528, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709-3528. The
petition requested that 40 CFR 180.583
be amended by establishing tolerances
for residues of the fungicide
triticonazole, (1RS)-(E)-5-[(4chlorophenyl)methylene]-2,2-dimethyl1-(1H-1,2,4-triazol-1ylmethyl)cyclopentanol, in or on grain,
cereal, group 15, except rice, and grain,
cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group
16, except rice, at 0.05 and 0.10 parts
per million (ppm), respectively. That
notice referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by BASF Corporation,
the registrant, which is available to the
public in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing. Based upon review of
the data supporting the petition, EPA
has modified both the crop group
terminology, and tolerance levels for
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
grain, cereal, group 15, except rice, at
0.01 ppm, and the crop group
terminology (only) for grain, cereal,
forage, fodder and straw, group 16,
except rice, at 0.10 ppm. These
tolerances replace previously
established individual tolerances for
barley, grain; barley, hay; barley, straw;
wheat, forage; wheat, grain; wheat, hay;
and wheat, straw at 0.05 ppm. The
reason for these changes is explained in
Unit IV.C.
hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue....’’
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, and the factors specified in
section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for the petitioned-for
tolerances for residues of triticonazole,
(1RS)-(E)-5-[(4chlorophenyl)methylene]-2,2-dimethyl1-(1H-1,2,4-triazol-1ylmethyl)cyclopentanol on grain, cereal,
group 15, except rice, at 0.01 ppm, and
grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw,
group 16, except rice, at 0.10 ppm.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with establishing tolerances
follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:37 Jan 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
Triticonazole has low acute toxicity,
is not a skin, eye, or respiratory irritant,
or a dermal sensitizer. Non-acute
toxicity studies show that the liver (rat,
mouse, dog) and adrenals (rat, dog,
rabbit) are target organs across species.
Adverse body weight changes (rat, dog,
rabbit, mouse) and clinical signs (rat,
dog, mouse) also were observed in
multiple species. In the developmental
and reproductive toxicity studies,
adverse effects were seen at the same
dose level in the offspring and parental
animals, and the offspring were not
qualitatively more susceptible compared
with adults. In the rat subchronic study,
decreased thymus weights were
reported at a dose level (~2,300
milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day))
two times higher than the limit dose
(1,000 mg/kg/day). Triticonazole was
negative for mutagenicity, and the
cancer classification is ‘‘Not Likely to Be
Carcinogenic to Humans’’ based on a
lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in
the two guideline studies conducted on
rats and mice.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by triticonazole 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 the document
‘‘Triticonazole. Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Seed
Treatment Use on Cereal Grains (Crop
Group 15) Including Barley, Field Corn,
Oats, Popcorn, Rye, Sorghum Grain,
Sweet Corn, Triticale, and Wheat
(Excluding Rice); and Forage, Fodder,
and Straw of Cereal Grains (Crop Group
16), Excluding Rice,’’ at pages 34 to 36
in docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2009–0276.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4285
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 triticonazole used for
human risk assessment can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov in the
document ‘‘Triticonazole. Human Health
Risk Assessment for Proposed Seed
Treatment Use on Cereal Grains (Crop
Group 15) Including Barley, Field Corn,
Oats, Popcorn, Rye, Sorghum Grain,
Sweet Corn, Triticale, and Wheat
(Excluding Rice); and Forage, Fodder,
and Straw of Cereal Grains (Crop Group
16), Excluding Rice,’’ at pages 15 to 16
in docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2009–0276.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to triticonazole, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing triticonazole tolerances in 40
CFR 180.583. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from triticonazole in food as
follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide,
if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1–day or single
exposure.
In estimating acute dietary exposure,
EPA used food consumption
information from the U.S. Department of
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
4286
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Agriculture (USDA) 1994–1996 and
1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of
Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII). As
to residue levels in food, EPA assumed
tolerance level residues of triticonazole
were found in all commodities and that
all commodities consumed were 100%
crop treated. Anticipated residues and/
or percent crop treated (PCT)
information were not used.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998
CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA
assumed tolerance level residues in all
commodities, and 100% crop treated for
all treated commodities. Anticipated
residues and/or PCT information were
not used.
iii. Cancer. Triticonazole is classified
as ‘‘not likely to be carcinogenic to
humans’’ based on the absence of
significant tumor increases in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies.
There is no evidence that triticonazole
is carcinogenic to humans, therefore an
exposure assessment to evaluate cancer
risk is not needed.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did
not use anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for triticonazole. Tolerance level
residues and/or 100% crop treated 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 triticonazole in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
triticonazole. 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.
The estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) used in the
dietary risk assessment were provided
by OPP’s Environmental Fate and
Effects Division and incorporated
directly into the dietary assessment. The
EDWCs used in the dietary assessment
were modeled using the surface water
model, Pesticide Root Zone Model/
Exposure Analysis Modeling System
(PRZM/EXAMS). For the acute point
estimate, the PRZM-EXAMS 1-in-10
year annual maximum EDWC was used.
For the chronic point estimate, the
PRZM-EXAMS 1-in-10 year annual
mean EDWC was used. PRZM-EXAMS
EDWCs were used because they were
higher (and therefore more protective)
than the groundwater model’s,
(Screening Concentration in Groudwater
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:37 Jan 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
model (SCI-GROW’s)) EDWC. Based on
the PRZM/EXAMS, the EDWCs of
triticonazole for acute exposures are
75.5 parts per billion (ppb) for surface
water and 5.7 ppb for ground water, and
chronic exposures for non-cancer
assessments are estimated to be 32.8
ppb for surface water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
acute dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value of 75.5 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration
value of 32.8 ppb was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
Triticonazole is currently registered for
the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Residential and
commercial turfgrass, golf courses, and
sod farms. EPA quantitatively assessed
the risk from residential exposure to
children from children’s incidental oral
post-application scenarios (hand to
mouth, mouthing grass, and soil
ingestion). Children and adults may also
have post-application dermal exposure
but dermal toxicity studies with
triticonazole did not identify any
adverse effects from such exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found triticonazole to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
triticonazole does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that triticonazole does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity
with other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
Triticonazole is a member of the
triazole-containing class of pesticides.
Although conazoles act similarly in
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
plants (fungi) by inhibiting ergosterol
biosynthesis, there is not necessarily a
relationship between their pesticidal
activity and their mechanism of toxicity
in mammals. Structural similarities do
not constitute a common mechanism of
toxicity. Evidence is needed to establish
that the chemicals operate by the same,
or essentially the same, sequence of
major biochemical events. In conazoles,
however, a variable pattern of
toxicological responses is found. Some
are hepatotoxic and hepatocarcinogenic
in mice; some induce thyroid tumors in
rats; and some induce developmental,
reproductive, and neurological effects in
rodents. Furthermore, the conazoles
produce a diverse range of biochemical
events including altered cholesterol
levels, stress responses, and altered
DNA methylation. It is not clearly
understood whether these biochemical
events are directly connected to their
toxicological outcomes. Thus, there is
currently no evidence to indicate that
conazoles share common mechanisms of
toxicity and EPA is not following a
cumulative risk approach based on a
common mechanism of toxicity for the
conazoles. For information regarding
EPA’s procedures for cumulating effects
from substances found to have a
common mechanism of toxicity, see
EPA’s website at https://www.epa.gov/
pesticides/cumulative.
Triticonazole and other triazolecontaining pesticides can form the
common metabolite 1,2,4-triazole and
two triazole conjugates (triazolylalanine
and triazolylacetic acid). To support
existing tolerances and to establish new
tolerances for triazole-derivative
pesticides, including triticonazole, EPA
conducted a human health risk
assessment for exposure to 1,2,4triazole, triazolylalanine, and
triazolylacetic acid resulting from the
use of all current and pending uses of
any triazole-derived fungicide. The risk
assessment is a highly conservative,
screening-level evaluation in terms of
hazards associated with common
metabolites (e.g., use of a maximum
combination of uncertainty factors) and
potential dietary and non-dietary
exposures (i.e., high end estimates of
both dietary and non-dietary exposures).
In addition, the Agency retained the
additional 10X FQPA safety factor for
the protection of infants and children.
The assessment includes evaluations of
risks for various subgroups, including
those comprised of infants and children.
The Agency’s complete risk assessment
is found in the propiconazole
reregistration docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, Docket
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
Identification (ID) Number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2005–0497.
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 SF. In applying this provision,
EPA either retains the default value of
10X, or uses a different additional safety
factor when reliable data available to
EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
The prenatal and postnatal toxicity
database for triticonazole includes rat
and rabbit developmental toxicity
studies and a two generation
reproduction study in rats. There is no
evidence of increased susceptibility
following in utero and/or postnatal
exposure in the developmental toxicity
studies in rats or rabbits, and in the 2generation rat reproduction study.
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
triticonazole is complete with the
exception of a newly required
immunotoxicity study. In accordance
with 40 CFR Part 158 toxicity data
requirements, an immunotoxicity study
(Harmonized guideline 870.7800) is
required for triticonazole. In the absence
of specific immunotoxicity studies, EPA
has evaluated the available triticonazole
toxicity data to determine whether an
additional uncertainty factor is needed
to account for potential immunotoxicity.
The toxicological database for
triticonazole does not indicate that the
immune system is the primary target
organ. Decreased thymus weight was
observed in only one species (rat) at the
highest dose tested (~2x the limit dose
of 1,000 mg/kg/day); these findings may
be due to secondary effects of overt
systemic toxicity. Based on this
evidence, EPA does not believe that
conducting immunotoxicity testing will
result in a point of departure lower than
those already selected for triticonazole
risk assessment, and an additional
uncertainty factor is not needed to
account for potential immunotoxicity.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:37 Jan 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
ii. There are no indications that
triticonazole is a neurotoxic chemical
and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
triticonazole results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the 2–generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure database. The
dietary food exposure assessments were
performed based on 100% crop treated
and tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to triticonazole
in drinking water. EPA used similarly
conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure of children as well
as incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic pesticide exposures are safe by
comparing aggregate exposure estimates
to the acute population adjusted dose
(aPAD) and chronic population adjusted
dose (cPAD). The aPAD and cPAD
represent the highest safe exposures,
taking into account all appropriate SFs.
EPA calculates the aPAD and cPAD by
dividing the POD by all applicable UFs.
For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates
the probability of additional cancer
cases given the estimated aggregate
exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and
chronic-term risks are evaluated by
comparing the estimated aggregate food,
water, and residential exposure to the
POD to ensure that the MOE called for
by the product of all applicable UFs is
not exceeded.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the combined acute
dietary exposure from food and water to
triticonazole will occupy < 1% of the
aPAD for (females 13 to 49 years old),
the population subgroups receiving the
greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to triticonazole
from food and water will utilize 1.4% of
the cPAD for all infants (< 1 year old),
the subgroup receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in
Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of triticonazole is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4287
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Triticonazole is
currently registered for use(s) 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
triticonazole.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded that the
combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures aggregated result
in aggregate MOEs of: 1,100 for children
1 to 2 years old, and 1,100 for all infants
< 1 year old. Because the level of
concern is for MOEs below 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).
Triticonazole is currently registered for
use(s) that could result in intermediateterm residential exposure and the
Agency has determined that it is
appropriate to aggregate chronic
exposure to triticonazole through food
and water with intermediate-term
exposures for triticonazole.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for intermediateterm exposures, EPA has concluded that
the combined intermediate-term food,
water, and residential exposures
aggregated result in aggregate MOEs of:
780 for children 1 to 2 years old, and
740 for all infants < 1 year old. Because
the level of concern is for MOEs below
100, these MOEs are not of concern.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Triticonazole is classified as
‘‘not likely to be carcinogenic to
humans’’ based on the absence of
significant tumor increases in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies.
Thus, triticonazole is not expected to
pose a cancer risk.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to triticonazole
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(liquid chromatography/mass
spectrometry (LC/MS), and liquid
chromatography/mass spectrometry/
mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS)
methods (Method 148.02) is available to
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
4288
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
enforce the tolerance expression. These
methods may be requested from: Chief,
Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;
telephone number: (410) 305–2905; email address: residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
There are no established Codex or
Mexican maximum residue levels
(MRLs)/tolerances for triticonazole on
wheat or barley. Triticonazole is
registered as a seed treatment in Canada
for oats, barley, and wheat, and has
established MRL levels at 0.01 ppm on
barley, oats, and wheat and for livestock
commodities at 0.05 ppm. The Canadian
MRLs on barley, oats, and wheat are in
harmony with the United States’ 0.01
ppm tolerance level for grain, cereal,
group 15, except rice. Additionally, no
U.S. tolerances have been established on
livestock commodities. No
harmonization issues exist in
connection with the proposed use on
turf.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
EPA determined the tolerances for
grain, cereal, group 15, except rice,
should be established at 0.01 ppm,
based on a harmonization concern with
Canada, and residue data which
supported this tolerance level. Thus the
proposed tolerance level of 0.05 ppm
was deemed excessive. Upon
establishing the grain, cereal, group 15,
except rice, tolerance at 0.01 ppm, the
individual tolerances established for
barley, straw; wheat, forage; wheat,
grain; wheat, hay; and wheat, straw at
0.05 ppm are being removed from 40
CFR 180.583(a).
hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of triticonazole, (1RS)-(E)-5[(4-chlorophenyl)methylene]-2,2dimethyl-1-(1H-1,2,4-triazol-1ylmethyl)cyclopentanol, in or on grain,
cereal, group 15, except rice, at 0.01
ppm, and grain, cereal, forage, fodder
and straw, group 16, except rice, at 0.10
ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances
under section 408(d) of FFDCA in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory
Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this final rule
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:37 Jan 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
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).
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).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: January 19, 2010.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
■
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.583 is amended by
revising the table in paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
■
§ 180.583 Triticonazole; tolerances for
residues.
(a) *
*
*
Parts per
million
Commodity
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder
and straw, group 16, except
rice ........................................
Grain, cereal, group 15, except
rice ........................................
*
*
*
*
0.10
0.01
*
[FR Doc. 2010–1614 Filed 1–26–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0675; FRL–8805–3]
Oxirane, 2-Methyl-, Polymer with
Oxirane, Dimethyl Ether; Tolerance
Exemption
E:\FR\FM\27JAR1.SGM
27JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 17 (Wednesday, January 27, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4284-4288]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-1614]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0276; FRL-8808-6]
Triticonazole; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
triticonazole in or on grain, cereal, group 15, except rice, and grain,
cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except rice. BASF
Corporation requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective January 27, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before March 29, 2010, 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-2009-0276. 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: Tawanda Maignan, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 308-8050; e-mail address: Maignan.Tawanda@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 Get Electronic Access to Other Related Information?
You may 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. To
access the OPPTS harmonized test guidelines referenced in this document
electronically, please go to https://www.epa.gov/oppts and select ``Test
Methods & Guidelines'' on the left-side navigation menu.
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-2009-0276 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 March 29, 2010.
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-2009-0276, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
II. Petition for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of August 19, 2009, (74 FR 41900) (FRL-
8426-7), 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
8F7420) by BASF Corporation, P.O. Box 13528, Research Triangle Park, NC
27709-3528. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.583 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide triticonazole,
(1RS)-(E)-5-[(4-chlorophenyl)methylene]-2,2-dimethyl-1-(1H-1,2,4-
triazol-1-ylmethyl)cyclopentanol, in or on grain, cereal, group 15,
except rice, and grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16,
except rice, at 0.05 and 0.10 parts per million (ppm), respectively.
That notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by BASF
Corporation, the registrant, which is available to the public in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing. Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has modified both the crop group
terminology, and tolerance levels for
[[Page 4285]]
grain, cereal, group 15, except rice, at 0.01 ppm, and the crop group
terminology (only) for grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group
16, except rice, at 0.10 ppm. These tolerances replace previously
established individual tolerances for barley, grain; barley, hay;
barley, straw; wheat, forage; wheat, grain; wheat, hay; and wheat,
straw at 0.05 ppm. The reason for these changes is explained in Unit
IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue....''
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure for the petitioned-for
tolerances for residues of triticonazole, (1RS)-(E)-5-[(4-
chlorophenyl)methylene]-2,2-dimethyl-1-(1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-
ylmethyl)cyclopentanol on grain, cereal, group 15, except rice, at 0.01
ppm, and grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except
rice, at 0.10 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated
with establishing tolerances follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
Triticonazole has low acute toxicity, is not a skin, eye, or
respiratory irritant, or a dermal sensitizer. Non-acute toxicity
studies show that the liver (rat, mouse, dog) and adrenals (rat, dog,
rabbit) are target organs across species. Adverse body weight changes
(rat, dog, rabbit, mouse) and clinical signs (rat, dog, mouse) also
were observed in multiple species. In the developmental and
reproductive toxicity studies, adverse effects were seen at the same
dose level in the offspring and parental animals, and the offspring
were not qualitatively more susceptible compared with adults. In the
rat subchronic study, decreased thymus weights were reported at a dose
level (~2,300 milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day)) two times higher
than the limit dose (1,000 mg/kg/day). Triticonazole was negative for
mutagenicity, and the cancer classification is ``Not Likely to Be
Carcinogenic to Humans'' based on a lack of evidence of carcinogenicity
in the two guideline studies conducted on rats and mice.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by triticonazole as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in the document ``Triticonazole. Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Seed Treatment Use on Cereal Grains (Crop Group
15) Including Barley, Field Corn, Oats, Popcorn, Rye, Sorghum Grain,
Sweet Corn, Triticale, and Wheat (Excluding Rice); and Forage, Fodder,
and Straw of Cereal Grains (Crop Group 16), Excluding Rice,'' at pages
34 to 36 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0276.
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 triticonazole used for
human risk assessment can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in the
document ``Triticonazole. Human Health Risk Assessment for Proposed
Seed Treatment Use on Cereal Grains (Crop Group 15) Including Barley,
Field Corn, Oats, Popcorn, Rye, Sorghum Grain, Sweet Corn, Triticale,
and Wheat (Excluding Rice); and Forage, Fodder, and Straw of Cereal
Grains (Crop Group 16), Excluding Rice,'' at pages 15 to 16 in docket
ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0276.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to triticonazole, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing triticonazole
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.583. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
triticonazole in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the U.S. Department of
[[Page 4286]]
Agriculture (USDA) 1994-1996 and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of
Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food, EPA
assumed tolerance level residues of triticonazole were found in all
commodities and that all commodities consumed were 100% crop treated.
Anticipated residues and/or percent crop treated (PCT) information were
not used.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance
level residues in all commodities, and 100% crop treated for all
treated commodities. Anticipated residues and/or PCT information were
not used.
iii. Cancer. Triticonazole is classified as ``not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans'' based on the absence of significant tumor
increases in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies. There is no
evidence that triticonazole is carcinogenic to humans, therefore an
exposure assessment to evaluate cancer risk is not needed.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for triticonazole. Tolerance level residues and/or
100% crop treated 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 triticonazole in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of triticonazole. 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.
The estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) used in the
dietary risk assessment were provided by OPP's Environmental Fate and
Effects Division and incorporated directly into the dietary assessment.
The EDWCs used in the dietary assessment were modeled using the surface
water model, Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS). For the acute point estimate, the PRZM-EXAMS 1-in-
10 year annual maximum EDWC was used. For the chronic point estimate,
the PRZM-EXAMS 1-in-10 year annual mean EDWC was used. PRZM-EXAMS EDWCs
were used because they were higher (and therefore more protective) than
the groundwater model's, (Screening Concentration in Groudwater model
(SCI-GROW's)) EDWC. Based on the PRZM/EXAMS, the EDWCs of triticonazole
for acute exposures are 75.5 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water
and 5.7 ppb for ground water, and chronic exposures for non-cancer
assessments are estimated to be 32.8 ppb for surface water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 75.5 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 32.8 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Triticonazole is
currently registered for the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Residential and commercial turfgrass, golf
courses, and sod farms. EPA quantitatively assessed the risk from
residential exposure to children from children's incidental oral post-
application scenarios (hand to mouth, mouthing grass, and soil
ingestion). Children and adults may also have post-application dermal
exposure but dermal toxicity studies with triticonazole did not
identify any adverse effects from such exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found triticonazole to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and triticonazole does not appear
to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
triticonazole does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
Triticonazole is a member of the triazole-containing class of
pesticides. Although conazoles act similarly in plants (fungi) by
inhibiting ergosterol biosynthesis, there is not necessarily a
relationship between their pesticidal activity and their mechanism of
toxicity in mammals. Structural similarities do not constitute a common
mechanism of toxicity. Evidence is needed to establish that the
chemicals operate by the same, or essentially the same, sequence of
major biochemical events. In conazoles, however, a variable pattern of
toxicological responses is found. Some are hepatotoxic and
hepatocarcinogenic in mice; some induce thyroid tumors in rats; and
some induce developmental, reproductive, and neurological effects in
rodents. Furthermore, the conazoles produce a diverse range of
biochemical events including altered cholesterol levels, stress
responses, and altered DNA methylation. It is not clearly understood
whether these biochemical events are directly connected to their
toxicological outcomes. Thus, there is currently no evidence to
indicate that conazoles share common mechanisms of toxicity and EPA is
not following a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of
toxicity for the conazoles. For information regarding EPA's procedures
for cumulating effects from substances found to have a common mechanism
of toxicity, see EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
Triticonazole and other triazole-containing pesticides can form the
common metabolite 1,2,4-triazole and two triazole conjugates
(triazolylalanine and triazolylacetic acid). To support existing
tolerances and to establish new tolerances for triazole-derivative
pesticides, including triticonazole, EPA conducted a human health risk
assessment for exposure to 1,2,4-triazole, triazolylalanine, and
triazolylacetic acid resulting from the use of all current and pending
uses of any triazole-derived fungicide. The risk assessment is a highly
conservative, screening-level evaluation in terms of hazards associated
with common metabolites (e.g., use of a maximum combination of
uncertainty factors) and potential dietary and non-dietary exposures
(i.e., high end estimates of both dietary and non-dietary exposures).
In addition, the Agency retained the additional 10X FQPA safety factor
for the protection of infants and children. The assessment includes
evaluations of risks for various subgroups, including those comprised
of infants and children. The Agency's complete risk assessment is found
in the propiconazole reregistration docket at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket
[[Page 4287]]
Identification (ID) Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0497.
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 SF. In
applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X,
or uses a different additional safety factor when reliable data
available to EPA support the choice of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The prenatal and postnatal
toxicity database for triticonazole includes rat and rabbit
developmental toxicity studies and a two generation reproduction study
in rats. There is no evidence of increased susceptibility following in
utero and/or postnatal exposure in the developmental toxicity studies
in rats or rabbits, and in the 2-generation rat reproduction study.
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 triticonazole is complete with the
exception of a newly required immunotoxicity study. In accordance with
40 CFR Part 158 toxicity data requirements, an immunotoxicity study
(Harmonized guideline 870.7800) is required for triticonazole. In the
absence of specific immunotoxicity studies, EPA has evaluated the
available triticonazole toxicity data to determine whether an
additional uncertainty factor is needed to account for potential
immunotoxicity. The toxicological database for triticonazole does not
indicate that the immune system is the primary target organ. Decreased
thymus weight was observed in only one species (rat) at the highest
dose tested (~2x the limit dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day); these findings may
be due to secondary effects of overt systemic toxicity. Based on this
evidence, EPA does not believe that conducting immunotoxicity testing
will result in a point of departure lower than those already selected
for triticonazole risk assessment, and an additional uncertainty factor
is not needed to account for potential immunotoxicity.
ii. There are no indications that triticonazole is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that triticonazole results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
database. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based on
100% crop treated and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to triticonazole in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to assess post-application exposure
of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the acute population
adjusted dose (aPAD) and chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD). The
aPAD and cPAD represent the highest safe exposures, taking into account
all appropriate SFs. EPA calculates the aPAD and cPAD by dividing the
POD by all applicable UFs. For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the
probability of additional cancer cases given the estimated aggregate
exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term risks are evaluated
by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, and residential
exposure to the POD to ensure that the MOE called for by the product of
all applicable UFs is not exceeded.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the combined acute dietary exposure from food
and water to triticonazole will occupy < 1% of the aPAD for (females 13
to 49 years old), the population subgroups receiving the greatest
exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
triticonazole from food and water will utilize 1.4% of the cPAD for all
infants (< 1 year old), the subgroup receiving the greatest exposure.
Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of triticonazole is
not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Triticonazole
is currently registered for use(s) 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 triticonazole.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded that the combined short-term food,
water, and residential exposures aggregated result in aggregate MOEs
of: 1,100 for children 1 to 2 years old, and 1,100 for all infants < 1
year old. Because the level of concern is for MOEs below 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). Triticonazole is currently registered for use(s) that could
result in intermediate-term residential exposure and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure to
triticonazole through food and water with intermediate-term exposures
for triticonazole.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for
intermediate-term exposures, EPA has concluded that the combined
intermediate-term food, water, and residential exposures aggregated
result in aggregate MOEs of: 780 for children 1 to 2 years old, and 740
for all infants < 1 year old. Because the level of concern is for MOEs
below 100, these MOEs are not of concern.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Triticonazole is
classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to humans'' based on the
absence of significant tumor increases in two adequate rodent
carcinogenicity studies. Thus, triticonazole is not expected to pose a
cancer risk.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to triticonazole residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (liquid chromatography/mass
spectrometry (LC/MS), and liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry/mass
spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) methods (Method 148.02) is available to
[[Page 4288]]
enforce the tolerance expression. These methods may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905;
e-mail address: residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
There are no established Codex or Mexican maximum residue levels
(MRLs)/tolerances for triticonazole on wheat or barley. Triticonazole
is registered as a seed treatment in Canada for oats, barley, and
wheat, and has established MRL levels at 0.01 ppm on barley, oats, and
wheat and for livestock commodities at 0.05 ppm. The Canadian MRLs on
barley, oats, and wheat are in harmony with the United States' 0.01 ppm
tolerance level for grain, cereal, group 15, except rice. Additionally,
no U.S. tolerances have been established on livestock commodities. No
harmonization issues exist in connection with the proposed use on turf.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
EPA determined the tolerances for grain, cereal, group 15, except
rice, should be established at 0.01 ppm, based on a harmonization
concern with Canada, and residue data which supported this tolerance
level. Thus the proposed tolerance level of 0.05 ppm was deemed
excessive. Upon establishing the grain, cereal, group 15, except rice,
tolerance at 0.01 ppm, the individual tolerances established for
barley, straw; wheat, forage; wheat, grain; wheat, hay; and wheat,
straw at 0.05 ppm are being removed from 40 CFR 180.583(a).
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
triticonazole, (1RS)-(E)-5-[(4-chlorophenyl)methylene]-2,2-dimethyl-1-
(1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-ylmethyl)cyclopentanol, in or on grain, cereal,
group 15, except rice, at 0.01 ppm, and grain, cereal, forage, fodder
and straw, group 16, except rice, at 0.10 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal
Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: January 19, 2010.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. Section 180.583 is amended by revising the table in paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
Sec. 180.583 Triticonazole; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except 0.10
rice......................................................
Grain, cereal, group 15, except rice....................... 0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-1614 Filed 1-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S