Cyazofamid; Pesticide Tolerances, 40745-40751 [2010-17025]
Download as PDF
40745
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 14, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
has harmonized the residue level with
established Codex MRLs on cherry and
peach, but notes that it is not possible
to harmonize the tolerance expression at
this time as the Codex MRL includes
parent only. Additionally, it is not
possible to harmonize with the codex
MRL for plums as the established Codex
MRL of 0.2 ppm is too low to cover
residues that could result from the use
of hexythiazox in the U.S.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
V. Conclusion
Therefore, the tolerance for residues
of hexythiazox, in or on plum, prune,
dried is revised from 0.4 ppm to 1.3
ppm; and the tolerance for fruit, stone,
group 12, except plum is revised to read
fruit, stone, group 12. The established
tolerances for plum and for plum,
prune, fresh can be removed as these
commodities are addressed by the stone
fruit group tolerance.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:02 Jul 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
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: July 1, 2010.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 § 180.448, the table in paragraph
(a) is amended as follows:
i. Remove the entry for plum at 0.10
ppm and for plum, prune, fresh at 0.10
ppm;
ii. Revise the entry for Fruit, stone,
group 12, except plum; and
iii. Revise the entry for plum, prune,
dried.
The revisions read as follows:
■
§ 180.448 Hexythiazox; tolerances for
residues.
Commodity
Parts per million
*
*
*
Fruit, stone, group 12 .....
*
*
*
Plum, prune, dried ..........
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
*
1.3
*
*
[FR Doc. 2010–17034 Filed 7–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0801; FRL–8833–1]
Cyazofamid; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of cyazofamid in
or on Brassica, head and stem, subgroup
5A; Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B;
turnip, greens; spinach; and hop, dried
cones. Interregional Research Project
Number 4 (IR-4) requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective July
14, 2010. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
September 13, 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–2009–0801. 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:\FR\FM\14JYR1.SGM
14JYR1
40746
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 14, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
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:
Laura Nollen, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–7390; e-mail address:
nollen.laura@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
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
site at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:02 Jul 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
C. How Can I File an Objection or
Hearing Request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 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–2009–0801 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before September 13, 2010. Addresses
for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40
CFR 178.25(b).
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. Information not marked
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2
may be disclosed publicly by EPA
without prior notice. Submit a copy of
your non-CBI objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0801, 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. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerances
In the Federal Register of January 6,
2010 (75 FR 864) (FRL–8801–5), 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 9E7615) by IR-4,
500 College Road East, Suite 201 W.,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.601 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
residues of the fungicide cyazofamid, 4chloro-2-cyano-N,N-dimethyl-5-(4methylphenyl)-1H-imidazole-1sulfonamide, and its metabolite CCIM,
4-chloro-5-(4-methylphenyl)-1Himidazole-2-carbonitrile, expressed as
cyazofamid, in or on Brassica, head and
stem, subgroup 5A at 1.2 parts per
million (ppm); Brassica, leafy greens,
subgroup 5B at 12.0 ppm; turnip, greens
at 12.0 ppm; spinach at 9.0 ppm; and
hops at 10.0 ppm. That notice
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared on behalf of IR-4 by ISK
Biosciences, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
EPA has revised the tolerance
expression for all established
commodities to be consistent with
current Agency policy. The reason for
this change 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 cyazofamid
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with cyazofamid follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
E:\FR\FM\14JYR1.SGM
14JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 14, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
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.
Cyazofamid has a low order of acute
toxicity via the oral, dermal, and
inhalation routes of exposure. It
produces minimal but reversible eye
irritation, is a slight dermal irritant, and
is a weak dermal sensitizer. In
subchronic toxicity studies in rats, the
kidney appeared to be the primary target
organ, with kidney effects including an
increased number of basophilic kidney
tubules and mild increases in urinary
volume, pH, and protein. No adverse
kidney effects were noted in chronic
toxicity studies in rats. There were no
toxicity findings up to the limit dose in
a subchronic toxicity study in dogs; in
the chronic dog toxicity study,
increased cysts in parathyroids were
observed in males at the highest dose
tested (HDT).
There were no maternal or
developmental effects observed in the
prenatal developmental toxicity study
in rabbits and no maternal,
reproductive, or offspring effects in the
2-generation reproductive toxicity study
in rats. There was evidence of increased
susceptibility following in utero
exposure of rats in the prenatal
developmental toxicity study at the
HDT; developmental effects, including
an increased incidence of bent ribs,
were observed in the absence of
maternal toxicity.
There was no evidence of
neurotoxicity in any study in the
exposure database for cyazofamid. Skin
lesions, which may be due to a systemic
allergy, were observed in male mice in
a carcinogenicity study. There was no
evidence of carcinogenicity in the rat or
mouse carcinogenicity studies and no
evidence that cyazofamid is mutagenic
in several in vivo and in vitro studies.
Based on the results of these studies,
EPA has classified cyazofamid as ‘‘not
likely to be carcinogenic to humans.’’
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by cyazofamid 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:
‘‘Cyazofamid. Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Uses on
Brassica (Cole) Leafy Vegetables Crop
Group 5, Turnip Greens, Spinach, and
Hops,’’ pp 34-38 in docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0801.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
40747
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which no adverse effects are
observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level – generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD) – and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). 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
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 cyazofamid used for
human risk assessment is shown in the
following Table.
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR CYAZOFAMID FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Point of Departure and Uncertainty/Safety Factors
Exposure/Scenario
Acute dietary (General population
including infants and children)
(Females
13–49
Study and Toxicological Effects
No adverse effects were observed which could be attributed to a single dose exposure for the general
population.
NOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Acute RfD = 1.0 mg/kg/day
aPAD = 1.0 mg/kg/day
Rat Prenatal Developmental Toxicity Study
LOAEL = 1,000 mg/kg/day based on developmental toxicity findings of increased incidence of bent ribs.
Chronic dietary (All populations)
NOAEL= 94.8 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Chronic RfD = 0.948 mg/
kg/day
cPAD = 0.948 mg/kg/day
18-Month Mouse Oral Carcinogenicity Study
LOAEL = 985 mg/kg/day based on increased skin lesions.
Incidental oral, short-term
(1 to 30 days) and intermediateterm (1-6 months)
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
Acute dietary
years of age)
RfD, PAD, LOC for Risk
Assessment
NOAEL= 30 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 100
90-day Rat Oral Toxicity Study
LOAEL = 295 mg/kg/day based on increased
number of basophilic tubules of the kidneys, increased urinary volume, pH, and
protein.
Dermal, short-term (1 to 30 days)
and
intermediate-term
(1-6
months)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:02 Jul 13, 2010
For Children: No toxicity was found at 1,000 mg/kg/day in a 28–day dermal toxicity study; therefore, in
the absence of hazard identified for this population, a dermal risk assessment is not necessary.
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\14JYR1.SGM
14JYR1
40748
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 14, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR CYAZOFAMID FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT—Continued
Point of Departure and Uncertainty/Safety Factors
Exposure/Scenario
For Adults: Dermal (or
oral) study
NOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day
(dermal absorption rate
= 37 %)
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation)
RfD, PAD, LOC for Risk
Assessment
LOC for MOE = 100
Study and Toxicological Effects
Rat Prenatal Developmental Toxicity Study
LOAEL = 1,000 mg/kg/day based on developmental toxicity findings of increased incidence of bent ribs.
Classification: ‘‘Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans’’ based on the absence of significant tumor increases in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies.
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population
(intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term risk assessment. UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose
(a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to cyazofamid, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing cyazofamid tolerances in 40
CFR 180.601. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from cyazofamid 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. EPA identified such an effect
(increased incidence of bent ribs in the
rat prenatal developmental toxicity
study) for the population subgroup
females 13 to 49 years old; however, no
such effect was identified for the general
population, including infants and
children.
In estimating acute dietary exposure
for females 13 to 49 years old, EPA used
food consumption information from the
United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) 1994 to 1996 and 1998
Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food
Intake by Individuals (CSFII). As to
residue levels in food, EPA assumed
tolerance-level residues, Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM)
default processing factors and 100
percent crop treated (PCT) for all
existing and proposed commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA 1994 to 1996 and 1998
CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA
assumed tolerance-level residues, DEEM
default processing factors and 100 PCT
for all existing and proposed
commodities.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:02 Jul 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that cyazofamid does not
pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore,
a dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for cyazofamid. 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 cyazofamid in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of cyazofamid.
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.
Available environmental fate studies
suggest cyazofamid is not very mobile
and quickly degrades into a number of
degradation products under different
environmental conditions. Among the
three major degradates for cyazofamid
(CCIM, CCIM-AM and CTCA), the two
terminal degradates are CCIM and
CTCA. The highest estimated drinking
water concentrations resulted from
modeling which assumed application of
100% molar conversion of the parent
into the terminal degradate CTCA. EPA
used these estimates of CTCA in its
dietary exposure assessments, a
conservative approach that likely
overestimates the exposure contribution
from drinking water. Based on the
Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure
Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
EXAMS) model for surface water and
the Screening Concentration in Ground
Water (SCI-GROW) model for ground
water, the estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) of CTCA for
acute exposures are estimated to be 136
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water
and 2.18 ppb for ground water. Chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments
are estimated to be 133 ppb for surface
water and 2.18 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
acute dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value of 136 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 133 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).
Cyazofamid is currently registered for
use on residential turf and ornamentals
and on professionally managed turf
areas, such as golf courses and college/
professional sports fields. For the use of
cyazofamid on professionally managed
turf areas, short-term and intermediateterm postapplication dermal exposure
was assessed for adult and youth golfers
and adult athletes. However, because it
is unlikely for an individual to
experience a co-occurrence of activities
within a single day, the scenarios of
golfing and/or using recreational fields
were not aggregated with the residential
turf and ornamental scenarios.
For the use of cyazofamid on
residential turf and ornamentals,
application by homeowners is
E:\FR\FM\14JYR1.SGM
14JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 14, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
prohibited; therefore, residential
handler exposure is not expected and
was not assessed. However, short-term
and intermediate-term postapplication
exposure is possible for adults and
children. Adults were assessed for
short-term and intermediate-term
postapplication dermal exposure from
contact with treated turf and
ornamentals. The adult population of
concern for dermal risk assessment is
females of childbearing age (13+), based
on the developmental toxicity findings
of increased incidence of bent ribs; thus,
the estimated risk for this population is
protective of all adult population
subgroups. Children were assessed for
short-term and intermediate-term
postapplication incidental oral exposure
to treated residential turf and
ornamentals, including hand-to-mouth
activity, object-to-mouth activity, and
soil ingestion. No POD was identified
for dermal exposures to treated turf or
ornamentals for children, since no
toxicity was seen in the 28–day dermal
toxicity study at the HDT (1,000 mg/kg/
day); therefore, dermal postapplication
exposure scenarios for children were
not assessed.
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 cyazofamid to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
cyazofamid does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that cyazofamid does not have
a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:02 Jul 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
The prenatal and postnatal toxicology
database for cyazofamid includes rat
and rabbit developmental toxicity
studies and a 2-generation reproductive
toxicity study in rats. There was no
indication of increased susceptibility, as
compared to adults, of rabbit fetuses to
in utero exposure in a developmental
study or of rat pups in the 2-generation
reproductive toxicity study. There is
evidence of increased quantitative
susceptibility following in utero
exposure of rats to cyazofamid in the
prenatal developmental study; an
increased incidence of bent ribs in
fetuses at the HDT was noted in the
absence of maternal effects.
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
cyazofamid is complete except for
immunotoxicity and subchronic
neurotoxicity testing. Recent changes to
40 CFR part 158 make immunotoxicity
testing (OSCPP Harmonized Guideline
870.7800) and subchronic neurotoxicity
testing (OSCPP Harmonized Guideline
158.500) required for pesticide
registration; however, the available data
for cyazofamid do not show potential
for immunotoxicity. Further, there is no
evidence of neurotoxicity in any study
in the toxicity database for cyazofamid.
EPA does not believe that conducting
neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity
studies will result in a NOAEL lower
than the regulatory dose for risk
assessment. Consequently, the EPA
believes the existing data are sufficient
for endpoint selection for exposure/risk
assessment scenarios and for evaluation
of the requirements under the FQPA,
and an additional database uncertainty
factor does not need to be applied.
ii. There is no indication that
cyazofamid 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
cyazofamid results in increased
susceptibility in rabbits in the prenatal
developmental study or in young rats in
the 2-generation reproductive toxicity
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40749
study. Although there is evidence of
increased quantitative susceptibility in
the prenatal developmental study in
rats, the Agency determined that
concern is low because:
a. The developmental effect
(increased bent ribs) is well identified
with a clear NOAEL and LOAEL.
b. Increased bent ribs are considered
a reversible variation rather than a
malformation.
c. The effect was noted only at the
limit dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day.
d. This endpoint was used to establish
the acute reference dose (aRfD) for
females 13–49.
e. The overall toxicity profile
indicates that cyazofamid is not a very
toxic compound.
Therefore, there are no residual
concerns regarding developmental
effects in the young.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100 PCT and
tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to cyazofamid
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 cyazofamid.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Shortterm, intermediate-term and chronicterm risks are evaluated by comparing
the estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to
cyazofamid will occupy 1.2% of the
aPAD for females 13 to 49 years old, the
population group of concern for acute
effects. Cyazofamid is not expected to
pose an acute risk to the general
population, including infants and
children.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to cyazofamid
E:\FR\FM\14JYR1.SGM
14JYR1
40750
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 14, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
from food and water will utilize 1.2% of
the cPAD for infants less than 1 year
old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the
explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic
residential exposure to residues of
cyazofamid is not expected.
3. Short-term and intermediate-term
risk. Short-term and intermediate-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term and intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Cyazofamid is currently registered for
uses that could result in short-term and
intermediate-term postapplication
residential exposure to adults and
children. The Agency has determined
that it is appropriate to aggregate
chronic exposure through food and
water with short-term and intermediateterm residential exposure to
cyazofamid.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term and
intermediate-term exposures, EPA has
concluded the combined short-term and
intermediate-term food, water, and
residential exposures (treated
residential turf and ornamentals)
aggregated result in MOEs of 1,000 for
the general U.S. population, 1,400 for
children 3 to 5 years old, and 1,500 for
children 6 to 12 years old. As the MOEs
are greater than 100 for all population
subgroups, short-term and intermediateterm aggregate exposure to cyazofamid
is not of concern.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
cyazofamid is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
5. 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 cyazofamid
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An adequate analytical methodology
is available to enforce the proposed
tolerances. Cyazofamid and the
metabolite CCIM are completely
recovered (>80% recovery) using FDA’s
Multi-Residue Protocol D (without
cleanup). In addition, a high
performance liquid chromatography/
ultraviolet detector (HPLC/UV) method
is available for use as a single analyte
confirmatory method. These methods
may be requested from: Chief,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:02 Jul 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
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
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N.
Food and Agriculture Organization/
World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized
as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade
agreements to which the United States
is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance
that is different from a Codex MRL;
however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4)
requires that EPA explain the reasons
for departing from the Codex level.
There are currently no Codex or
Canadian MRLs established for residues
of cyazofamid in or on commodities
associated with this petition.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
The EPA has revised the tolerance
expression to clarify: 1. That, as
provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3),
the tolerance covers metabolites and
degradates of cyazofamid not
specifically mentioned; 2. That
compliance with the specified tolerance
levels is to be determined by measuring
only the specific compounds mentioned
in the tolerance expression.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of cyazofamid, 4-chloro-2cyano-N,N-dimethyl-5-(4methylphenyl)-1H-imidazole-1sulfonamide, and its metabolite 4chloro-5-(4-methylphenyl)-1Himidazole-2-carbonitrile, calculated as
the stoichiometric equivalent of
cyazofamid, in or on Brassica, head and
stem, subgroup 5A at 1.2 ppm; Brassica,
leafy greens, subgroup 5B at 12.0 ppm;
turnip, greens at 12.0 ppm; spinach at
9.0 ppm; and hop, dried cones at 10.0
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
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\14JYR1.SGM
14JYR1
40751
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 14, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
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: July 1, 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 180.601 is amended by:
i. Revising the introductory text and
alphabetically adding the following
■
commodities to the table in paragraph
(a):
ii. Revising the introductory text in
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 180.601
residues.
Cyazofamid; tolerances for
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of the fungicide
cyazofamid, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the following table.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified in the following table is to be
determined by measuring only the sum
of 4-chloro-2-cyano-N,N-dimethyl-5-(4methylphenyl)-1H-imidazole-1sulfonamide and its metabolite, 4chloro-5-(4-methylphenyl)-1Himidazole-2-carbonitrile, calculated as
the stoichiometric equivalent of
cyazofamid, in or on the following
commodities:
Commodity
Parts per million
Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A ........................................................................................................................................
1.2
Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B ............................................................................................................................................
12.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
Hop dried cones ............................................................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Spinach ..........................................................................................................................................................................................
*
10.0
9.0
Turnip, greens
12.0
*
*
*
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. Tolerances with regional
registrations are established for residues
of the fungicide cyazofamid, including
its metabolites and degradates, in or on
the commodities in the following table.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified in the following table is to be
determined by measuring only the sum
of 4-chloro-2-cyano-N,N-dimethyl-5-(4methylphenyl)-1H-imidazole-1sulfonamide and its metabolite, 4chloro-5-(4-methylphenyl)-1Himidazole-2-carbonitrile, calculated as
the stoichiometric equivalent of
cyazofamid, in or on the following
commodities:
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2010–17025 Filed 7–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:02 Jul 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
*
*
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0231; FRL–8834–4]
Castor Oil, Ethoxylated, Oleate;
Tolerance Exemption
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of castor oil,
ethoxylated, oleate (CAS Reg. No.
220037–02–5) with a minimum number
average molecular weight (in amu) of
1,600 when used as an inert ingredient
in a pesticide chemical formulation
under 40 CFR 180.960. SciReg. Inc. on
behalf of Rhodia, Inc, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of castor oil, ethoxylated,
oleate on food or feed commodities.
DATES: This regulation is effective July
14, 2010. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
September 13, 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–2010–0231. 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
E:\FR\FM\14JYR1.SGM
14JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 14, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40745-40751]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17025]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0801; FRL-8833-1]
Cyazofamid; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
cyazofamid in or on Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A; Brassica,
leafy greens, subgroup 5B; turnip, greens; spinach; and hop, dried
cones. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective July 14, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before September 13, 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-2009-0801. 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,
[[Page 40746]]
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: Laura Nollen, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-7390; e-mail address: nollen.laura@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 site at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
C. How Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 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-2009-0801 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
September 13, 2010. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
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. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2
may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit a copy of
your non-CBI objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0801, 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. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerances
In the Federal Register of January 6, 2010 (75 FR 864) (FRL-8801-
5), 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
9E7615) by IR-4, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W., Princeton, NJ
08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.601 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide cyazofamid, 4-
chloro-2-cyano-N,N-dimethyl-5-(4-methylphenyl)-1H-imidazole-1-
sulfonamide, and its metabolite CCIM, 4-chloro-5-(4-methylphenyl)-1H-
imidazole-2-carbonitrile, expressed as cyazofamid, in or on Brassica,
head and stem, subgroup 5A at 1.2 parts per million (ppm); Brassica,
leafy greens, subgroup 5B at 12.0 ppm; turnip, greens at 12.0 ppm;
spinach at 9.0 ppm; and hops at 10.0 ppm. That notice referenced a
summary of the petition prepared on behalf of IR-4 by ISK Biosciences,
the registrant, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
EPA has revised the tolerance expression for all established
commodities to be consistent with current Agency policy. The reason for
this change 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 cyazofamid including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with cyazofamid
follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity,
[[Page 40747]]
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.
Cyazofamid has a low order of acute toxicity via the oral, dermal,
and inhalation routes of exposure. It produces minimal but reversible
eye irritation, is a slight dermal irritant, and is a weak dermal
sensitizer. In subchronic toxicity studies in rats, the kidney appeared
to be the primary target organ, with kidney effects including an
increased number of basophilic kidney tubules and mild increases in
urinary volume, pH, and protein. No adverse kidney effects were noted
in chronic toxicity studies in rats. There were no toxicity findings up
to the limit dose in a subchronic toxicity study in dogs; in the
chronic dog toxicity study, increased cysts in parathyroids were
observed in males at the highest dose tested (HDT).
There were no maternal or developmental effects observed in the
prenatal developmental toxicity study in rabbits and no maternal,
reproductive, or offspring effects in the 2-generation reproductive
toxicity study in rats. There was evidence of increased susceptibility
following in utero exposure of rats in the prenatal developmental
toxicity study at the HDT; developmental effects, including an
increased incidence of bent ribs, were observed in the absence of
maternal toxicity.
There was no evidence of neurotoxicity in any study in the exposure
database for cyazofamid. Skin lesions, which may be due to a systemic
allergy, were observed in male mice in a carcinogenicity study. There
was no evidence of carcinogenicity in the rat or mouse carcinogenicity
studies and no evidence that cyazofamid is mutagenic in several in vivo
and in vitro studies. Based on the results of these studies, EPA has
classified cyazofamid as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.''
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by cyazofamid 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: ``Cyazofamid. Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Uses on Brassica (Cole) Leafy Vegetables Crop
Group 5, Turnip Greens, Spinach, and Hops,'' pp 34-38 in docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0801.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level - generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD) - and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). 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 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 cyazofamid used for
human risk assessment is shown in the following Table.
Table 1.--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for cyazofamid for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of Departure and
Exposure/Scenario Uncertainty/Safety RfD, PAD, LOC for Risk Study and Toxicological
Factors Assessment Effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (General population No adverse effects were observed which could be attributed to a single
including infants and children) dose exposure for the general population.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (Females 13-49 years of NOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day Acute RfD = 1.0 mg/kg/ Rat Prenatal
age) UFA = 10x.............. day Developmental Toxicity
UFH = 10x.............. aPAD = 1.0 mg/kg/day... Study
FQPA SF = 1x........... LOAEL = 1,000 mg/kg/day
based on developmental
toxicity findings of
increased incidence of
bent ribs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations) NOAEL= 94.8 mg/kg/day Chronic RfD = 0.948 mg/ 18-Month Mouse Oral
UFA = 10x.............. kg/day Carcinogenicity Study
UFH = 10x.............. cPAD = 0.948 mg/kg/day. LOAEL = 985 mg/kg/day
FQPA SF = 1x........... based on increased
skin lesions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidental oral, short-term NOAEL= 30 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 100 90-day Rat Oral
(1 to 30 days) and intermediate-term UFA = 10x.............. Toxicity Study
(1-6 months). UFH = 10x.............. LOAEL = 295 mg/kg/day
FQPA SF = 1x........... based on increased
number of basophilic
tubules of the
kidneys, increased
urinary volume, pH,
and protein.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dermal, short-term (1 to 30 days) and For Children: No toxicity was found at 1,000 mg/kg/day in a 28-day dermal
intermediate-term (1-6 months) toxicity study; therefore, in the absence of hazard identified for this
population, a dermal risk assessment is not necessary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40748]]
For Adults: Dermal (or LOC for MOE = 100 Rat Prenatal
oral) study Developmental Toxicity
NOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day Study
(dermal absorption LOAEL = 1,000 mg/kg/day
rate = 37 %). based on developmental
UFA = 10x.............. toxicity findings of
UFH = 10x.............. increased incidence of
FQPA SF = 1x........... bent ribs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: ``Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans'' based on the
absence of significant tumor increases in two adequate rodent
carcinogenicity studies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members
of the human population (intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term
study for long-term risk assessment. UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. FQPA
SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD =
reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to cyazofamid, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing cyazofamid tolerances in 40 CFR
180.601. EPA assessed dietary exposures from cyazofamid 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. EPA identified such an
effect (increased incidence of bent ribs in the rat prenatal
developmental toxicity study) for the population subgroup females 13 to
49 years old; however, no such effect was identified for the general
population, including infants and children.
In estimating acute dietary exposure for females 13 to 49 years
old, EPA used food consumption information from the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1994 to 1996 and 1998 Nationwide
Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue
levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance-level residues, Dietary Exposure
Evaluation Model (DEEM) default processing factors and 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) for all existing and proposed commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994 to
1996 and 1998 CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed
tolerance-level residues, DEEM default processing factors and 100 PCT
for all existing and proposed commodities.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that cyazofamid does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the dietary assessment
for cyazofamid. 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 cyazofamid in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of cyazofamid. 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.
Available environmental fate studies suggest cyazofamid is not very
mobile and quickly degrades into a number of degradation products under
different environmental conditions. Among the three major degradates
for cyazofamid (CCIM, CCIM-AM and CTCA), the two terminal degradates
are CCIM and CTCA. The highest estimated drinking water concentrations
resulted from modeling which assumed application of 100% molar
conversion of the parent into the terminal degradate CTCA. EPA used
these estimates of CTCA in its dietary exposure assessments, a
conservative approach that likely overestimates the exposure
contribution from drinking water. Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS) model for surface
water and the Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) model
for ground water, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)
of CTCA for acute exposures are estimated to be 136 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 2.18 ppb for ground water. Chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 133 ppb for
surface water and 2.18 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 136 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 133 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).
Cyazofamid is currently registered for use on residential turf and
ornamentals and on professionally managed turf areas, such as golf
courses and college/professional sports fields. For the use of
cyazofamid on professionally managed turf areas, short-term and
intermediate-term postapplication dermal exposure was assessed for
adult and youth golfers and adult athletes. However, because it is
unlikely for an individual to experience a co-occurrence of activities
within a single day, the scenarios of golfing and/or using recreational
fields were not aggregated with the residential turf and ornamental
scenarios.
For the use of cyazofamid on residential turf and ornamentals,
application by homeowners is
[[Page 40749]]
prohibited; therefore, residential handler exposure is not expected and
was not assessed. However, short-term and intermediate-term
postapplication exposure is possible for adults and children. Adults
were assessed for short-term and intermediate-term postapplication
dermal exposure from contact with treated turf and ornamentals. The
adult population of concern for dermal risk assessment is females of
childbearing age (13+), based on the developmental toxicity findings of
increased incidence of bent ribs; thus, the estimated risk for this
population is protective of all adult population subgroups. Children
were assessed for short-term and intermediate-term postapplication
incidental oral exposure to treated residential turf and ornamentals,
including hand-to-mouth activity, object-to-mouth activity, and soil
ingestion. No POD was identified for dermal exposures to treated turf
or ornamentals for children, since no toxicity was seen in the 28-day
dermal toxicity study at the HDT (1,000 mg/kg/day); therefore, dermal
postapplication exposure scenarios for children were not assessed.
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 cyazofamid to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and cyazofamid does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
cyazofamid does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The prenatal and postnatal
toxicology database for cyazofamid includes rat and rabbit
developmental toxicity studies and a 2-generation reproductive toxicity
study in rats. There was no indication of increased susceptibility, as
compared to adults, of rabbit fetuses to in utero exposure in a
developmental study or of rat pups in the 2-generation reproductive
toxicity study. There is evidence of increased quantitative
susceptibility following in utero exposure of rats to cyazofamid in the
prenatal developmental study; an increased incidence of bent ribs in
fetuses at the HDT was noted in the absence of maternal effects.
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 cyazofamid is complete except for
immunotoxicity and subchronic neurotoxicity testing. Recent changes to
40 CFR part 158 make immunotoxicity testing (OSCPP Harmonized Guideline
870.7800) and subchronic neurotoxicity testing (OSCPP Harmonized
Guideline 158.500) required for pesticide registration; however, the
available data for cyazofamid do not show potential for immunotoxicity.
Further, there is no evidence of neurotoxicity in any study in the
toxicity database for cyazofamid. EPA does not believe that conducting
neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity studies will result in a NOAEL lower
than the regulatory dose for risk assessment. Consequently, the EPA
believes the existing data are sufficient for endpoint selection for
exposure/risk assessment scenarios and for evaluation of the
requirements under the FQPA, and an additional database uncertainty
factor does not need to be applied.
ii. There is no indication that cyazofamid 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 cyazofamid results in increased
susceptibility in rabbits in the prenatal developmental study or in
young rats in the 2-generation reproductive toxicity study. Although
there is evidence of increased quantitative susceptibility in the
prenatal developmental study in rats, the Agency determined that
concern is low because:
a. The developmental effect (increased bent ribs) is well
identified with a clear NOAEL and LOAEL.
b. Increased bent ribs are considered a reversible variation rather
than a malformation.
c. The effect was noted only at the limit dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day.
d. This endpoint was used to establish the acute reference dose
(aRfD) for females 13-49.
e. The overall toxicity profile indicates that cyazofamid is not a
very toxic compound.
Therefore, there are no residual concerns regarding developmental
effects in the young.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to cyazofamid 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 cyazofamid.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-term, intermediate-term and
chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate
food, water, and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure
that an adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to cyazofamid will occupy 1.2% of the aPAD for females 13 to 49 years
old, the population group of concern for acute effects. Cyazofamid is
not expected to pose an acute risk to the general population, including
infants and children.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
cyazofamid
[[Page 40750]]
from food and water will utilize 1.2% of the cPAD for infants less than
1 year old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure. Based
on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of cyazofamid is not
expected.
3. Short-term and intermediate-term risk. Short-term and
intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account short-term and
intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Cyazofamid is
currently registered for uses that could result in short-term and
intermediate-term postapplication residential exposure to adults and
children. The Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate
chronic exposure through food and water with short-term and
intermediate-term residential exposure to cyazofamid.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term and intermediate-term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined
short-term and intermediate-term food, water, and residential exposures
(treated residential turf and ornamentals) aggregated result in MOEs of
1,000 for the general U.S. population, 1,400 for children 3 to 5 years
old, and 1,500 for children 6 to 12 years old. As the MOEs are greater
than 100 for all population subgroups, short-term and intermediate-term
aggregate exposure to cyazofamid is not of concern.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, cyazofamid is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
5. 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 cyazofamid residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An adequate analytical methodology is available to enforce the
proposed tolerances. Cyazofamid and the metabolite CCIM are completely
recovered (>80% recovery) using FDA's Multi-Residue Protocol D (without
cleanup). In addition, a high performance liquid chromatography/
ultraviolet detector (HPLC/UV) method is available for use as a single
analyte confirmatory method. 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
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. Food and
Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards
program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
There are currently no Codex or Canadian MRLs established for
residues of cyazofamid in or on commodities associated with this
petition.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
The EPA has revised the tolerance expression to clarify: 1. That,
as provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), the tolerance covers
metabolites and degradates of cyazofamid not specifically mentioned; 2.
That compliance with the specified tolerance levels is to be determined
by measuring only the specific compounds mentioned in the tolerance
expression.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of cyazofamid,
4-chloro-2-cyano-N,N-dimethyl-5-(4-methylphenyl)-1H-imidazole-1-
sulfonamide, and its metabolite 4-chloro-5-(4-methylphenyl)-1H-
imidazole-2-carbonitrile, calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent
of cyazofamid, in or on Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A at 1.2
ppm; Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B at 12.0 ppm; turnip, greens at
12.0 ppm; spinach at 9.0 ppm; and hop, dried cones at 10.0 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
[[Page 40751]]
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: July 1, 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 180.601 is amended by:
i. Revising the introductory text and alphabetically adding the
following commodities to the table in paragraph (a):
ii. Revising the introductory text in paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 180.601 Cyazofamid; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
fungicide cyazofamid, including its metabolites and degradates, in or
on the commodities in the following table. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified in the following table is to be determined
by measuring only the sum of 4-chloro-2-cyano-N,N-dimethyl-5-(4-
methylphenyl)-1H-imidazole-1-sulfonamide and its metabolite, 4-chloro-
5-(4-methylphenyl)-1H-imidazole-2-carbonitrile, calculated as the
stoichiometric equivalent of cyazofamid, in or on the following
commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brassica, head and stem, subgroup 5A................. 1.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B.................. 12.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Hop dried cones...................................... 10.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Spinach.............................................. 9.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Turnip, greens....................................... 12.0
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. Tolerances with
regional registrations are established for residues of the fungicide
cyazofamid, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the following table. Compliance with the tolerance
levels specified in the following table is to be determined by
measuring only the sum of 4-chloro-2-cyano-N,N-dimethyl-5-(4-
methylphenyl)-1H-imidazole-1-sulfonamide and its metabolite, 4-chloro-
5-(4-methylphenyl)-1H-imidazole-2-carbonitrile, calculated as the
stoichiometric equivalent of cyazofamid, in or on the following
commodities:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-17025 Filed 7-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S