Thiabendazole; Pesticide Tolerances, 54033-54040 [2010-22121]
Download as PDF
54033
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by November 2, 2010. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements (see section
307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: July 29, 2010.
Jeff Scott,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 9.
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
■
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F—California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(380) to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(380) The following plan was
submitted on July 14, 2010, by the
Governor’s Designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution
Control District.
(1) ‘‘Board Order #080128–01
Requiring the City of Los Angeles to
Undertake Measures to Control PM–10
Emissions from the Dried Bed of Owens
Lake,’’ including Attachments A–D,
adopted February 1, 2008, and included
as Appendix C to the ‘‘2010 PM–10
Maintenance Plan and Redesignation
Request for the Coso Junction Planning
Area,’’ adopted May 17, 2010.
(ii) Additional materials.
(A) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution
Control District (GBUAPCD).
(1) Non-regulatory portions of ‘‘The
2010 PM–10 Maintenance Plan and
Redesignation Request for the Coso
Junction Planning Area’’ (the 2010 Plan),
including Appendices A, B, and D,
adopted May 17, 2010.
(2) Letter dated June 10, 2010 from
Theodore D. Schade, GBUAPCD, to
Deborah Jordan, United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9, regarding Coso Junction PM–
10 Contingency Measures.
(3) GBUAPCD Board Resolution
2010–01, dated May 17, 2010, adopting
the 2010 Plan.
(B) California Air Resources Board
(CARB).
(1) CARB Resolution 10–25, dated
June 24, 2010, adopting the 2010 Plan.
PART 81—[AMENDED]
3. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart C—[Amended]
4. Section 81.305 is amended in the
table for ‘‘California–PM–10’’ by revising
the entry under Inyo County for the
‘‘Coso Junction planning area’’ to read as
follows:
■
§ 81.305
*
*
California.
*
*
*
CALIFORNIA—PM–10
Designation
Classification
Designated area
Date
Inyo County
Coso Junction planning area ..........................
That portion of Inyo County contained within
Hydrologic Unit #18090205.
*
*
*
*
*
*
October 4, 2010 .........
*
*
Type
*
*
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of thiabendazole,
and its metabolites, benzimidazole (free
and conjugated), [2-(4-thiazolyl)
benzimidazole], in or on corn. Syngenta
Crop Protection requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
This regulation is effective
September 3, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before November 2, 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).
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
DATES:
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0910; FRL–8842–7]
Thiabendazole; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
14:12 Sep 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Type
Attainment.
SUMMARY:
[FR Doc. 2010–21960 Filed 9–2–10; 8:45 am]
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Date
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2009–0910. 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
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM
03SER1
54034
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
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:
Janet Whitehurst, Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (703) 305–6129; e-mail address:
whitehurst.janet@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?
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:12 Sep 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
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–2009–0910 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 November 2, 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–2009–0910, 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
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of June 6, 2010
(75 FR 35804) (FRL–8831–3), 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 0F7730) by
Syngenta Crop Science. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.242 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the fungicide thiabendazole,
and its metabolites, benzimidazole (free
and conjugated), [2-(4-thiazolyl)
benzimidazole], in or on corn grain and
other corn commodities at 0.01 parts per
million (ppm). That notice referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by
Syngenta Crop Protection, the registrant,
which is available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
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 thiabendazole
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with thiabendazole follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
The target organs for thiabendazole
toxicity are the liver and thyroid. Effects
to these organs were observed in
multiple studies and across species.
Thiabendazole causes thyroid tumors in
male rats through an established nonlinear mode of action involving
perturbation of thyroid hormone
synthesis. Accordingly, thiabendazole is
classified as ‘‘not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans at doses that do
not alter rat thyroid hormone
homeostasis.’’ There is no evidence of
neurotoxicity in the existing database,
E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM
03SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
and in developmental and reproductive
studies, effects to offspring are observed
only at doses toxic to the parents. There
are no effects seen in the toxicity
database that would be attributable to a
single exposure of thiabendazole. The
Agency is regulating chronic dietary risk
with a chronic RfD at a dose below
which thyroid hormone balance is not
impacted and consequently is protective
of potential carcinogenic effects.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by thiabendazole 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
entitled ‘‘Thiabendazole Human Health
Risk Assessment for Seed Treatment
Use on Corn,’’ pages 6–11 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0546.
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/
54035
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 thiabendazole used for
human risk assessment is shown in the
following Table 1.
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR THIAZBENDAZOLE FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH
RISK ASSESSMENT
Exposure/Scenario
Point of Departure
Acute dietary (general
population including females 13–49 years)
Uncertainty/FQPA Factors
Level of Concern for Risk
Assessment
Study and Toxicological
Effects
No effect attributable to a single dose seen in the database
NOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day
UFA = 3x
UFH = 10x
FQPA = UFDB = 10x
cRfD = 0.033 mg/kg/day
cPAD = 0.033 mg/kg/day
2-Year Feed/Chronic Carcinogenicity in the Rat
LOAEL = 30 mg/kg/day
based on decreased
body weight gains and
histopathological
changes in liver and
thyroid
Incidental oral (ST/IT)
NOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day
UFA = 3x
UFH = 10x
FQPA = UFDB = 10x
LOC for MOE = 300
Dermal short-term (1-30
days) DAF = 0.5%
NOAEL= 10 mg/kg/day
UFA = 3x
UFH = 10
FQPA = UFDB = 10x
Occupational and residential LOC for MOE = 300
Inhalation short-term (1–30
days)
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Chronic dietary
NOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day
UFA = 3x
UFH =10x
FQPA = UFDB = 10x
Occupational LOC for
MOE = 300
Subchronic oral toxicity
study - rat
LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/day
based on reduced body
weight gains and
histopathological
changes in the bone
marrow, liver and thyroid
Subchronic oral toxicity
study - rat
LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/day
based on reduced body
weight gains and
histopathological
changes in the bone
marrow, liver and thyroid
Subchronic oral toxicity
study - rat
LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/day
based on reduced body
weight gains and
histopathological
changes in the bone
marrow, liver and thyroid
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:12 Sep 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM
03SER1
54036
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR THIAZBENDAZOLE FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH
RISK ASSESSMENT—Continued
Exposure/Scenario
Dermal intermediate-term
(1-6 mos) DAF = 0.5%*
Inhalation intermediateterm (1-6 mos)
Cancer (all routes)
Uncertainty/FQPA Factors
Point of Departure
NOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day
Level of Concern for Risk
Assessment
UFA = 3x
UFH = 10x
FQPA = UFDB = 10x
Study and Toxicological
Effects
Occupational LOC for
MOE = 300
Subchronic oral toxicity
study - rat
LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/day
based on reduced body
weight gains and
histopathological
changes in the bone
marrow, liver and thyroid
NOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day
UFA = 3x
Occupational LOC for
Subchronic oral toxicity
UFH = 10x
MOE = 300
study - rat
FQPA = UFDB = 10x
LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/day
based on reduced body
weight gains and
histopathological
changes in the bone
marrow, liver and thyroid
Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans at doses that do not alter rat thyroid hormone homeostasis
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies).
UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).
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.
The overall composite uncertainty
factor for assessing thiabendazole risk is
300X. That is based on a 10X for
intraspecies variability among humans,
3X for interspecies pharmacokinetic
differences between humans and rats,
and 10X for FQPA safety factor for
database uncertainty. The 3X
interspecies factor was chosen because
the endpoint used for the Point of
Departure is a thyroid effect and adult
rats are known to be more sensitive
pharmacodynamically to thyroid
toxicants than humans. Focusing on the
thyroid effects will produce the most
protective PAD despite the fact that a
reduced interspecies factor is
appropriate as to this effect.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to thiabendazole, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing thiabendazole tolerances in 40
CFR 180.242. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from thiabendazole 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. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:12 Sep 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
for thiabendazole; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. Thiabendazole
chronic dietary exposure assessments
were conducted using the DEEMFCIDTM (ver. 2.03) which incorporates
consumption data from the United
States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) Continuing Survey of Food
Intake by Individuals (CSFII) (1994–
1996 and 1998). In estimating residue
levels on food, EPA assumed residues in
corn were at tolerances levels. For other
commodities, EPA estimated residue
levels based on residue monitoring data.
EPA also used percent crop treated
(PCT) data on some commodities.
iii. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. Section 408(b)(2)(E) of
FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available
data and information on the anticipated
residue levels of pesticide residues in
food and the actual levels of pesticide
residues that have been measured in
food. If EPA relies on such information,
EPA must require pursuant to FFDCA
section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5
years after the tolerance is established,
modified, or left in effect, demonstrating
that the levels in food are not above the
levels anticipated. For the present
action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
as are required by FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be
required to be submitted no later than
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
5 years from the date of issuance of
these tolerances.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states
that the Agency may use data on the
actual percent of food treated for
assessing chronic dietary risk only if:
• Condition a: The data used are
reliable and provide a valid basis to
show what percentage of the food
derived from such crop is likely to
contain the pesticide residue.
• Condition b: The exposure estimate
does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group.
• Condition c: Data are available on
pesticide use and food consumption in
a particular area, the exposure estimate
does not understate exposure for the
population in such area.
In addition, the Agency must provide
for periodic evaluation of any estimates
used. To provide for the periodic
evaluation of the estimate of PCT as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F),
EPA may require registrants to submit
data on PCT.
The following PCT were used in the
assessment:
• Apple 30%.
• Orange 20%.
• Pear 45%.
• Potato 1%.
• Soybeans 1%.
• Strawberry 6.3% imported.
• Sweet potato 1%.
• Wheat 1%.
In most cases, EPA uses available data
from USDA/National Agricultural
E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM
03SER1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Statistics Service (NASS), proprietary
market surveys, and the National
Pesticide Use Database for the chemical/
crop combination for the most recent 6–
7 years. EPA uses an average PCT for
chronic dietary risk analysis. The
average PCT figure for each existing use
is derived by combining available
public and private market survey data
for that use, averaging across all
observations, and rounding to the
nearest 5%, except for those situations
in which the average PCT is less than
one. In those cases, 1% is used as the
average PCT and 2.5% is used as the
maximum PCT. EPA uses a maximum
PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the highest
observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available
public and private market survey data
for the existing use and rounded up to
the nearest multiple of 5%.
The Agency believes that the three
conditions discussed above have been
met. With respect to Condition a, PCT
estimates are derived from Federal and
private market survey data, which are
reliable and have a valid basis. The
Agency is reasonably certain that the
percentage of the food treated is not
likely to be an underestimation. As to
Conditions b and c, regional
consumption information and
consumption information for significant
subpopulations is taken into account
through EPA’s computer-based model
for evaluating the exposure of
significant subpopulations including
several regional groups. Use of this
consumption information in EPA’s risk
assessment process ensures that EPA’s
exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant
subpopulation group and allows the
Agency to be reasonably certain that no
regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those
estimated by the Agency. Other than the
data available through national food
consumption surveys, EPA does not
have available reliable information on
the regional consumption of food to
which thiabendazole may be applied in
a particular area.
iv. Cancer. EPA has concluded that
thiabendazole does not pose a cancer
risk to humans. Therefore, a dietary
exposure assessment for the purpose of
assessing cancer risk is unnecessary.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for thiabendazole drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of
thiabendazole. Further information
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:12 Sep 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
A Tier 2 drinking water assessment
was conducted for thiabendazole in
surface water and Tier 1 in ground
water for the proposed new seed
treatment product on corn. The annual
mean concentration of 0.0000048 ppm
was used in the chronic dietary
exposure analysis. Drinking water
concentrations from ground water
sources were estimated, but were lower
than that estimated concentration from
surface water, so the estimated
concentration from surface water
sources was used in the dietary
exposure analysis.
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).
Thiabendazole is currently registered
for the following uses that could result
in residential exposures: paint and
sponges. These residential uses have
been assessed and aggregated with the
food and water exposures. EPA assumed
that 5% of the thiabendazole on sponges
is transferred to the surface being wiped
(such as counters, tables, floors) each
day. Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
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 thiabendazole to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
thiabendazole does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that thiabendazole 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
54037
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
In prenatal developmental toxicity
studies in rats, rabbits, and mice and in
the 2-generation reproduction study in
rats, effects in the fetuses or neonates
occurred at or above doses that caused
maternal or parental toxicity.
3. Conclusion. EPA is retaining a
FQPA factor of 10X based on the
following findings:
i. The database for thiabendazole is
complete except for a developmental
thyroid study and data needed for the
new data requirements including an
immunotoxicity study and the
neurotoxicity screening battery. Pending
the outcome of the developmental
thyroid toxicity study, there is
uncertainty with respect to the effect of
thiabendazole in developing offspring.
There is evidence of thyroid toxicity
following subchronic and chronic
exposures to rats characterized as
histopathological changes in the thyroid
in multiple studies in rats. Disruption of
thyroid homeostasis is the initial,
critical effect that may lead to adverse
effects on the developing nervous
system. Thus, the absence of the
developmental thyroid study raises
concern whether infants and children
are sufficiently protected from
developmental effects. The
developmental thyroid toxicity study
will better address this concern than a
developmental neurotoxicity study. The
absence of neurotoxicity studies (acute,
subchronic, and developmental) raise
relatively low concern because: (1)
Thiabendazole has shown no indication
of neurotoxicity in relevant studies, and;
(2) to the extent that thiabendazole’s
thyroid effects may have neurological
effects on the young, the nature of the
thyroid effects (and the potential for any
resulting neurological effects on the
young) will be addressed by the
developmental thyroid study. The
E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM
03SER1
54038
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
absence of the immunotoxicity study
raises relatively low concern because
there are no indications in the available
studies that organs associated with
immune function, such as the thymus
and spleen, are affected by
thiabendazole.
ii. There is no evidence that
thiabendazole results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study.
iii. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on PCT and
anticipated residues primarily from
Pesticide Data Program (PDP) data and
some tolerance-level residues. These
data are reliable and will not
underestimate the exposure and risk.
EPA made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground water and
surface water modeling used to assess
exposure to thiabendazole 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 thiabendazole.
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 population
adjusted dose (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. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account acute
exposure estimates from dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, thiabendazole is not
expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to thiabendazole
from food and water will utilize 1.4% of
the cPAD occupied for the U.S.
population. The most highly exposed
subpopulation was all infants at 4.6%
cPAD.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk.
Short-term and intermediate-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). To assess short-term
and intermediate-term aggregate risk
likely to result from the new and
existing thiabendazole uses, EPA
combined average food and water
exposures with estimates of residential
exposure for both adult painters and
adult females and small children
exposed to surfaces cleaned with treated
sponges.
No risks of concern were seen for
adult painters. A potential risk of
concern would be the use of
thiabendazole treated sponges, if the
Agency assumes that 100% of the
thiabendazole on a treated sponge is
transferred to surfaces each day. It is
very unlikely that a sponge would
release all of the thiabendazole used to
treat it in a single day, and the user
would use a new sponge every day.
Since this is a very unrealistic
assumption, a second aggregate
assessment was conducted assuming
that 100% of the thiabendazole on a
treated sponge is transferred to surfaces
over 20 days and that each 20 days the
user would use a new sponge. This
assumption is still conservative because:
(1) Sponges will generally be used much
longer than 20 days; (2) it is very
unlikely that 100% of the thiabendazole
would be released from the sponge in
such a short period given that
environmental fate data show
thiabendazole to have low water
solubility indicating that thiabendazole
will bind strongly to the sponge; and (3)
it is very unlikely that 100% of any
released thiabendazole would be
transferred to countertops because this
assumption does not account for any
thiabendazole that is washed down the
sink or that normally degrades. With
this assumption, none of the aggregate
exposures represent risks of concern, as
all MOEs are greater than the target
MOE of 300.
A summary of the short-term and
intermediate-term aggregate risk for
thiabendazole used in the human risk
assessment is shown in Tables 2 and 3
of this unit.
TABLE 2.—SHORT-TERM AND INTERMEDIATE-TERM AGGREGATE RISK FOR RESIDENTIAL PAINTER
Average Food and
Water Exposure (mg/kg/
day)
Population Subgroup
Residential Exposure1
(mg/kg/day)
Aggregate MOE (food
and residential)2
U.S. Population
0.000451
0.0046
2000
Youth (13–19 yrs)
0.000289
0.0046
2000
Adults (20–49 yrs)
0.000308
0.0046
2000
Adults (50 + yrs)
0.000331
0.0046
2000
Females (13–49 yrs)
0.000333
0.0046
2000
1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
2
Residential Exposure = Dermal exposure + Inhalation Exposure.
(Avg Food Aggregate MOE = NOAEL (10 mg/kg/day and Water Exposure + Residential Exposure).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:12 Sep 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM
03SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
54039
TABLE 3.–SHORT-TERM AND INTERMEDIATE-TERM AGGREGATE RISK CALCULATIONS FOR SPONGE USAGE
Average Food and
Water Exposure (mg/kg/
day)
Population Subgroup
Residential Exposure1
(mg/kg/day)
Aggregate MOE (food
and residential)2
Fraction of Thiabendazole Transferred Daily From Sponge to Surface = 100%
Children (3–5 yrs)
0.001252
0.08
120
Females (13–49 yrs)
0.000333
0.02
500
Fraction of Thiabendazole Transferred From Sponge to Surface = 5%
Children (3–5 yrs)
0.001252
0.004
2300
Females (13–49 yrs)
0.000333
0.001
4500
1 Residential
2 Aggregate
Exposure = Dermal exposure + Inhalation Exposure.
MOE = NOAEL (10 mg/kg/day) ÷ (Average Food & Water Exposure plus Residential Exposure).
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
thiabendazole is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
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
thiabendazole residues.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(spectrophotofluorometric, Methods I,
A, B and C) is available to enforce the
tolerance expression. In all of the
methods, residues are extracted with
ethyl acetate, and the extracts are
purified by washing with dilute NaOH
and/or HCl.
An high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC) method with
fluorescence detection (FLD) is available
for the enforcement of tolerances for
residues of free and conjugated
benzimidazole. This method is listed in
the U.S. EPA Index of Residue
Analytical Methods under
thiabendazole as Study No. 93020
(MRID 43328302).
In addition, the analytical method
used in this petition may be used for
enforcement. This sample is extracted
and hydrolized and analyzed by liquid
chromatography/mass spectrometry
(LC/MS/MS). The method limit of
quantation (LOQ) is 0.01 ppm, and the
limit of detection (LOD) is 0.004 ppm.
The method was adequately validated
using samples of field corn forage, grain,
and stover, and sweet corn forage and
K+CWHR fortified with each analyte at
0.01, 0.05, and 0.1 ppm. Acceptable
concurrent recovery data for the method
were also submitted and achieved.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:12 Sep 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
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.
The Codex has not established any
MRLs for thiabendazole.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of thiabendazole, and its
metabolites, benzimidazole (free and
conjugated), [2-(4-thiazolyl)
benzimidazole], in or on corn grain and
other corn commodities at 0.01 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
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM
03SER1
54040
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
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: August 20, 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 180.242 is amended by
alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table in paragraph
(a)(1) to read as follows:
■
§ 180.242 Thiabendazole; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * * (1) * * *
Parts per
million
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Commodity
*
*
Corn, field, forage ................
Corn, field, grain
Corn, field, stover .................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
*
Expiration/
Revocation
Date
*
0.01
0.01
None
None
0.01
None
14:12 Sep 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
Parts per
million
Commodity
Corn, pop, forage ................
Corn, pop, grain
Corn, pop, stover .................
Corn, sweet, forage ................
Corn, sweet,
kernels plus
cop with
husks removed ...........
Corn, sweet,
stover ............
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Expiration/
Revocation
Date
0.01
0.01
None
None
0.01
None
0.01
None
0.01
None
0.01
*
None
*
*
[FR Doc. 2010–22121 Filed 9–2–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket No. 03–123; DA 10–1235]
Telecommunications Relay Services
and Speech-to-Speech Services for
Individuals With Hearing and Speech
Disabilities
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule; extension of waiver.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Commission extends for an additional
year current waivers of certain
Telecommunications Relay Services
(TRS) mandatory minimum standards
for Video Relay Service (VRS) and
Internet Protocol Relay (IP Relay). The
waived TRS mandatory minimum
standards are: One-line voice carry over
(VCO); VCO-to-teletypewriter (TTY);
VCO-to-VCO; one-line hearing carry
over (HCO); HCO-to-TTY; HCO-to-HCO;
call release; speech-to-speech (STS);
pay-per-call (900) calls; types of calls;
and equal access to interexchange
carriers requirements. The Commission
also extends for one year a requirement
for default Internet-based TRS providers
that are unable to meet such standards
for newly-registered Internet-based TRS
users who port their customer premises
equipment (CPE) from a former default
provider. The Commission extends the
waivers for one year because the record
demonstrates that it is technologically
infeasible for VRS and IP Relay
providers to offer these services at this
time. All of these waivers are
conditioned on the filing of a report,
due April 16, 2011, addressing whether
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
it is necessary for the waivers to remain
in effect.
DATES: DA 10–1235 became effective on
June 30, 2010. The waivers of certain
TRS mandatory minimum standards for
VRS and IP Relay will expire on July 1,
2011, or until the Commission addresses
pending petitions regarding CPE
portability, which ever comes first.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554. Parties may
submit documentation related to the
waivers, identified by [CG Docket No.
03–123 and/or DA 10–1235], by mail, to
Dana Wilson, Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Disability
Rights Office, Room 3–C418.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregory Hlibok, (202) 559–5158 (voice/
videophone), or e-mail
Gregory.Hlibok@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s
document DA 10–1235, adopted June
30, 2010, released June 30, 2010
extending certain waivers for TRS
mandatory minimum standards to July
1, 2011. The full text of document DA
10–1235, and copies of any
subsequently filed documents in this
matter, will be available for public
inspection and copies during regular
business hours at the FCC Reference
Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th
Street, SW., Room CY–A257,
Washington, DC 20554. DA 10–1235,
and copies of subsequently filed
documents in this matter also may be
purchased from the Commission’s
duplicating contractor at Portals II, 445
12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20554. Customers may
contact the Commission’s duplicating
contractor at its Web site, https://
www.bcpiweb.com or by calling 1–800–
378–3160.
To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities
(Braille, large print, electronic files,
audio format), send an e-mail to
fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer
and Governmental Affairs Bureau at
(202) 418–0530 (voice) or (202) 418–
0432 (TTY). The Commission’s
document DA 10–1235 can also be
downloaded in Word and Portable
Document Format (PDF) at https://
www.fcc.gov/cgb/dro.trs.html.
Synopsis
One-line VCO, VCO-to-TTY, and
VCO-to-VCO. One-line VCO is a type of
traditional TTY-based TRS that can be
used by persons with a hearing
disability who can speak. The VCO user
speaks directly to the other party to the
call, and the CA types the response back
E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM
03SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 171 (Friday, September 3, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54033-54040]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-22121]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0910; FRL-8842-7]
Thiabendazole; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
thiabendazole, and its metabolites, benzimidazole (free and
conjugated), [2-(4-thiazolyl) benzimidazole], in or on corn. Syngenta
Crop Protection requested these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective September 3, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before November 2, 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-2009-0910. 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
[[Page 54034]]
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: Janet Whitehurst, Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 305-6129; e-mail
address: whitehurst.janet@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-2009-0910 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
November 2, 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-2009-0910, 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 Tolerance
In the Federal Register of June 6, 2010 (75 FR 35804) (FRL-8831-3),
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 0F7730)
by Syngenta Crop Science. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.242 be
amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide
thiabendazole, and its metabolites, benzimidazole (free and
conjugated), [2-(4-thiazolyl) benzimidazole], in or on corn grain and
other corn commodities at 0.01 parts per million (ppm). That notice
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Syngenta Crop
Protection, the registrant, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
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 thiabendazole including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with thiabendazole
follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
The target organs for thiabendazole toxicity are the liver and
thyroid. Effects to these organs were observed in multiple studies and
across species. Thiabendazole causes thyroid tumors in male rats
through an established non-linear mode of action involving perturbation
of thyroid hormone synthesis. Accordingly, thiabendazole is classified
as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to humans at doses that do not alter
rat thyroid hormone homeostasis.'' There is no evidence of
neurotoxicity in the existing database,
[[Page 54035]]
and in developmental and reproductive studies, effects to offspring are
observed only at doses toxic to the parents. There are no effects seen
in the toxicity database that would be attributable to a single
exposure of thiabendazole. The Agency is regulating chronic dietary
risk with a chronic RfD at a dose below which thyroid hormone balance
is not impacted and consequently is protective of potential
carcinogenic effects.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by thiabendazole 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 entitled ``Thiabendazole Human
Health Risk Assessment for Seed Treatment Use on Corn,'' pages 6-11 in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0546.
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 thiabendazole used for
human risk assessment is shown in the following Table 1.
Table 1.--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Thiazbendazole for Use in Human Health Risk
Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level of Concern Study and
Exposure/Scenario Point of Departure Uncertainty/FQPA for Risk Toxicological
Factors Assessment Effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (general No effect attributable to a single dose seen in the
population including females 13- database
49 years)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary NOAEL = 10 mg/kg/ UFA = 3x cRfD = 0.033 mg/kg/ 2-Year Feed/
day UFH = 10x......... day Chronic
FQPA = UFDB = 10x. cPAD = 0.033 mg/kg/ Carcinogenicity
day. in the Rat
LOAEL = 30 mg/kg/
day based on
decreased body
weight gains and
histopathological
changes in liver
and thyroid
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidental oral (ST/IT) NOAEL = 10 mg/kg/ UFA = 3x LOC for MOE = 300 Subchronic oral
day UFH = 10x......... toxicity study -
FQPA = UFDB = 10x. rat
LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/
day based on
reduced body
weight gains and
histopathological
changes in the
bone marrow,
liver and thyroid
Dermal short-term (1-30 days) NOAEL= 10 mg/kg/ UFA = 3x Occupational and Subchronic oral
DAF = 0.5% day UFH = 10.......... residential LOC toxicity study -
FQPA = UFDB = 10x. for MOE = 300 rat
LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/
day based on
reduced body
weight gains and
histopathological
changes in the
bone marrow,
liver and thyroid
Inhalation short-term (1-30 NOAEL = 10 mg/kg/ UFA = 3x Occupational LOC Subchronic oral
days) day UFH =10x.......... for MOE = 300 toxicity study -
FQPA = UFDB = 10x. rat
LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/
day based on
reduced body
weight gains and
histopathological
changes in the
bone marrow,
liver and thyroid
[[Page 54036]]
Dermal intermediate-term (1-6 NOAEL = 10 mg/kg/ UFA = 3x Occupational LOC Subchronic oral
mos) DAF = 0.5%* day UFH = 10x......... for MOE = 300 toxicity study -
FQPA = UFDB = 10x. rat
LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/
day based on
reduced body
weight gains and
histopathological
changes in the
bone marrow,
liver and thyroid
Inhalation intermediate-term (1- NOAEL = 10 mg/kg/ UFA = 3x Occupational LOC Subchronic oral
6 mos) day UFH = 10x......... for MOE = 300 toxicity study -
FQPA = UFDB = 10x. rat
LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/
day based on
reduced body
weight gains and
histopathological
changes in the
bone marrow,
liver and thyroid
Cancer (all routes) Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans at doses that do not alter rat thyroid
hormone homeostasis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies).
UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).
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.
The overall composite uncertainty factor for assessing
thiabendazole risk is 300X. That is based on a 10X for intraspecies
variability among humans, 3X for interspecies pharmacokinetic
differences between humans and rats, and 10X for FQPA safety factor for
database uncertainty. The 3X interspecies factor was chosen because the
endpoint used for the Point of Departure is a thyroid effect and adult
rats are known to be more sensitive pharmacodynamically to thyroid
toxicants than humans. Focusing on the thyroid effects will produce the
most protective PAD despite the fact that a reduced interspecies factor
is appropriate as to this effect.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to thiabendazole, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing thiabendazole
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.242. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
thiabendazole 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. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies for thiabendazole; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. Thiabendazole chronic dietary exposure
assessments were conducted using the DEEM-FCID\TM\ (ver. 2.03) which
incorporates consumption data from the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals
(CSFII) (1994-1996 and 1998). In estimating residue levels on food, EPA
assumed residues in corn were at tolerances levels. For other
commodities, EPA estimated residue levels based on residue monitoring
data. EPA also used percent crop treated (PCT) data on some
commodities.
iii. Anticipated residue and PCT information. Section 408(b)(2)(E)
of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and information on the
anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in food and the actual
levels of pesticide residues that have been measured in food. If EPA
relies on such information, EPA must require pursuant to FFDCA section
408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is
established, modified, or left in effect, demonstrating that the levels
in food are not above the levels anticipated. For the present action,
EPA will issue such data call-ins as are required by FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be
required to be submitted no later than 5 years from the date of
issuance of these tolerances.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary
risk only if:
Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a
valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop
is likely to contain the pesticide residue.
Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
Condition c: Data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area.
In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any
estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate
of PCT as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require
registrants to submit data on PCT.
The following PCT were used in the assessment:
Apple 30%.
Orange 20%.
Pear 45%.
Potato 1%.
Soybeans 1%.
Strawberry 6.3% imported.
Sweet potato 1%.
Wheat 1%.
In most cases, EPA uses available data from USDA/National
Agricultural
[[Page 54037]]
Statistics Service (NASS), proprietary market surveys, and the National
Pesticide Use Database for the chemical/crop combination for the most
recent 6-7 years. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk
analysis. The average PCT figure for each existing use is derived by
combining available public and private market survey data for that use,
averaging across all observations, and rounding to the nearest 5%,
except for those situations in which the average PCT is less than one.
In those cases, 1% is used as the average PCT and 2.5% is used as the
maximum PCT. EPA uses a maximum PCT for acute dietary risk analysis.
The maximum PCT figure is the highest observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available public and private market survey
data for the existing use and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%.
The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed above have
been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates are derived from
Federal and private market survey data, which are reliable and have a
valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that the percentage of
the food treated is not likely to be an underestimation. As to
Conditions b and c, regional consumption information and consumption
information for significant subpopulations is taken into account
through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating the exposure of
significant subpopulations including several regional groups. Use of
this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment process ensures
that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency to be reasonably
certain that no regional population is exposed to residue levels higher
than those estimated by the Agency. Other than the data available
through national food consumption surveys, EPA does not have available
reliable information on the regional consumption of food to which
thiabendazole may be applied in a particular area.
iv. Cancer. EPA has concluded that thiabendazole does not pose a
cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is unnecessary.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for thiabendazole drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of thiabendazole. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
A Tier 2 drinking water assessment was conducted for thiabendazole
in surface water and Tier 1 in ground water for the proposed new seed
treatment product on corn. The annual mean concentration of 0.0000048
ppm was used in the chronic dietary exposure analysis. Drinking water
concentrations from ground water sources were estimated, but were lower
than that estimated concentration from surface water, so the estimated
concentration from surface water sources was used in the dietary
exposure analysis.
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).
Thiabendazole is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: paint and sponges. These
residential uses have been assessed and aggregated with the food and
water exposures. EPA assumed that 5% of the thiabendazole on sponges is
transferred to the surface being wiped (such as counters, tables,
floors) each day. Further information regarding EPA standard
assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures may be found
at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
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 thiabendazole to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and thiabendazole does not appear
to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
thiabendazole 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. In prenatal developmental
toxicity studies in rats, rabbits, and mice and in the 2-generation
reproduction study in rats, effects in the fetuses or neonates occurred
at or above doses that caused maternal or parental toxicity.
3. Conclusion. EPA is retaining a FQPA factor of 10X based on the
following findings:
i. The database for thiabendazole is complete except for a
developmental thyroid study and data needed for the new data
requirements including an immunotoxicity study and the neurotoxicity
screening battery. Pending the outcome of the developmental thyroid
toxicity study, there is uncertainty with respect to the effect of
thiabendazole in developing offspring. There is evidence of thyroid
toxicity following subchronic and chronic exposures to rats
characterized as histopathological changes in the thyroid in multiple
studies in rats. Disruption of thyroid homeostasis is the initial,
critical effect that may lead to adverse effects on the developing
nervous system. Thus, the absence of the developmental thyroid study
raises concern whether infants and children are sufficiently protected
from developmental effects. The developmental thyroid toxicity study
will better address this concern than a developmental neurotoxicity
study. The absence of neurotoxicity studies (acute, subchronic, and
developmental) raise relatively low concern because: (1) Thiabendazole
has shown no indication of neurotoxicity in relevant studies, and; (2)
to the extent that thiabendazole's thyroid effects may have
neurological effects on the young, the nature of the thyroid effects
(and the potential for any resulting neurological effects on the young)
will be addressed by the developmental thyroid study. The
[[Page 54038]]
absence of the immunotoxicity study raises relatively low concern
because there are no indications in the available studies that organs
associated with immune function, such as the thymus and spleen, are
affected by thiabendazole.
ii. There is no evidence that thiabendazole results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iii. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on PCT and anticipated residues primarily from Pesticide Data Program
(PDP) data and some tolerance-level residues. These data are reliable
and will not underestimate the exposure and risk. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground water and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to thiabendazole 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
thiabendazole.
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 population adjusted dose (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. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into account
acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure was
identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
thiabendazole is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
thiabendazole from food and water will utilize 1.4% of the cPAD
occupied for the U.S. population. The most highly exposed subpopulation
was all infants at 4.6% cPAD.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. Short-term and intermediate-
term aggregate exposure takes into account short-term residential
exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a
background exposure level). To assess short-term and intermediate-term
aggregate risk likely to result from the new and existing thiabendazole
uses, EPA combined average food and water exposures with estimates of
residential exposure for both adult painters and adult females and
small children exposed to surfaces cleaned with treated sponges.
No risks of concern were seen for adult painters. A potential risk
of concern would be the use of thiabendazole treated sponges, if the
Agency assumes that 100% of the thiabendazole on a treated sponge is
transferred to surfaces each day. It is very unlikely that a sponge
would release all of the thiabendazole used to treat it in a single
day, and the user would use a new sponge every day. Since this is a
very unrealistic assumption, a second aggregate assessment was
conducted assuming that 100% of the thiabendazole on a treated sponge
is transferred to surfaces over 20 days and that each 20 days the user
would use a new sponge. This assumption is still conservative because:
(1) Sponges will generally be used much longer than 20 days; (2) it is
very unlikely that 100% of the thiabendazole would be released from the
sponge in such a short period given that environmental fate data show
thiabendazole to have low water solubility indicating that
thiabendazole will bind strongly to the sponge; and (3) it is very
unlikely that 100% of any released thiabendazole would be transferred
to countertops because this assumption does not account for any
thiabendazole that is washed down the sink or that normally degrades.
With this assumption, none of the aggregate exposures represent risks
of concern, as all MOEs are greater than the target MOE of 300.
A summary of the short-term and intermediate-term aggregate risk
for thiabendazole used in the human risk assessment is shown in Tables
2 and 3 of this unit.
Table 2.--Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Aggregate Risk for Residential Painter
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Food and Water Residential Exposure1 Aggregate MOE (food and
Population Subgroup Exposure (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) residential)2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Population 0.000451 0.0046 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Youth (13-19 yrs) 0.000289 0.0046 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adults (20-49 yrs) 0.000308 0.0046 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adults (50 + yrs) 0.000331 0.0046 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Females (13-49 yrs) 0.000333 0.0046 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Residential Exposure = Dermal exposure + Inhalation Exposure.
2 (Avg Food Aggregate MOE = NOAEL (10 mg/kg/day and Water Exposure + Residential Exposure).
[[Page 54039]]
Table 3.-Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Aggregate Risk Calculations for Sponge Usage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Food and Water Residential Exposure\1\ Aggregate MOE (food and
Population Subgroup Exposure (mg/kg/day) (mg/kg/day) residential)\2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fraction of Thiabendazole Transferred Daily From Sponge to Surface = 100%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Children (3-5 yrs) 0.001252 0.08 120
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Females (13-49 yrs) 0.000333 0.02 500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fraction of Thiabendazole Transferred From Sponge to Surface = 5%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Children (3-5 yrs) 0.001252 0.004 2300
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Females (13-49 yrs) 0.000333 0.001 4500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Residential Exposure = Dermal exposure + Inhalation Exposure.
\2\ Aggregate MOE = NOAEL (10 mg/kg/day) / (Average Food & Water Exposure plus Residential Exposure).
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, thiabendazole is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
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 thiabendazole residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (spectrophotofluorometric, Methods
I, A, B and C) is available to enforce the tolerance expression. In all
of the methods, residues are extracted with ethyl acetate, and the
extracts are purified by washing with dilute NaOH and/or HCl.
An high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method with
fluorescence detection (FLD) is available for the enforcement of
tolerances for residues of free and conjugated benzimidazole. This
method is listed in the U.S. EPA Index of Residue Analytical Methods
under thiabendazole as Study No. 93020 (MRID 43328302).
In addition, the analytical method used in this petition may be
used for enforcement. This sample is extracted and hydrolized and
analyzed by liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). The
method limit of quantation (LOQ) is 0.01 ppm, and the limit of
detection (LOD) is 0.004 ppm. The method was adequately validated using
samples of field corn forage, grain, and stover, and sweet corn forage
and K+CWHR fortified with each analyte at 0.01, 0.05, and 0.1 ppm.
Acceptable concurrent recovery data for the method were also submitted
and achieved.
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.
The Codex has not established any MRLs for thiabendazole.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
thiabendazole, and its metabolites, benzimidazole (free and
conjugated), [2-(4-thiazolyl) benzimidazole], in or on corn grain and
other corn commodities at 0.01 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
[[Page 54040]]
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: August 20, 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 180.242 is amended by alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table in paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.242 Thiabendazole; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * * (1) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expiration/
Commodity Parts per Revocation
million Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Corn, field, forage........................... 0.01 None
Corn, field, grain............................ 0.01 None
Corn, field, stover........................... 0.01 None
Corn, pop, forage............................. 0.01 None
Corn, pop, grain.............................. 0.01 None
Corn, pop, stover............................. 0.01 None
Corn, sweet, forage........................... 0.01 None
Corn, sweet, kernels plus cop with husks 0.01 None
removed......................................
Corn, sweet, stover........................... 0.01 None
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-22121 Filed 9-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S