Pesticide Science Policy; Notice of Withdrawal, 60113-60114 [2010-24307]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Notices
II. How can I request to participate in
this meeting?
This meeting is open for the public to
attend. You may attend the meeting
without further notification. Non EPA
attendees will need to be signed in at
B. How can I get copies of this document lobby security and escorted to the fourth
floor meeting room.
and other related information?
List of Subjects
1. Docket. EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket ID
Environmental protection.
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0001.
Dated: September 17, 2010.
Publicly available docket materials are
Kevin Keaney,
available either in the electronic docket
at https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only Acting Director, Field and External Affairs
Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
available in hard copy, at the Office of
[FR Doc. 2010–24435 Filed 9–28–10; 8:45 am]
Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Public Docket in Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
operation of this Docket Facility are
AGENCY
from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0935; FRL–8804–7]
holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is (703) 305–5805.
Pesticide Science Policy; Notice of
2. Electronic access. You may access
Withdrawal
this Federal Register document
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
electronically through the EPA Internet
Agency (EPA).
under the Federal Register listings at
ACTION: Notice.
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Those persons who are or may be
required to conduct testing of chemical
substances under the Federal Food,
Drug and Cosmetics Act (FFDCA), or the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).
II. Background
1. SFIREG/EQI letter re:
environmental and human health
benchmarks.
2. EPA use of monitoring data vs. use
of modeling outputs in registration
review process.
3. Endangered Species—bulletins
update, possible rulemaking procedure,
new biological opinions.
4. Bed bugs: ‘‘One State’s Experience’’,
EPA taskforce update, misuse of
pesticide products, proposed next steps.
5. Water quality Pesticide Regulatory
Education Program (PREP) update.
6. Water quality PREP—National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) discussions.
7. NPDES permit update—rollout,
feedback and comments, EPA responses,
NPDES/FIFRA Workgroup meeting, next
steps.
8. Pesticide Of Interest Tracking
System (POINTS) database—reporting
and use update.
9. OPP and OECA updates.
10. Office of Water updates—Drinking
water strategy.
11. Status of deleted and underreview pesticides (endosulfan, atrazine),
pyrethoids and pyrethrins reevaluation,
chlorpyrifos lawsuit, and usefulness to
the states of Study Profile Templates for
pesticide registration applications?
12. Canary software—detect
intentional or unintentional
contamination in drinking water
systems.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Sep 28, 2010
Jkt 220001
EPA announces the
withdrawal of the pesticide science
policy document ‘‘Use of the Pesticide
Data Program (PDP) in Acute Risk
Assessment.’’ In estimating dietary
exposure to pesticides, the Agency uses
a variety of data and different models.
This science policy document was
developed to explain a particular
statistical methodology, known as
decomposition, for using information
from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA) Pesticide Data
Program (PDP) in risk assessments of
acute exposure to pesticide residues in
food. EPA is withdrawing this policy
because EPA has been using a less
resource-intensive and generally
comparable method of analyzing data on
pesticide residues. This action is in
response to the recommendations made
by EPA’s Office of Inspector General
during its review of EPA’s
implementation of the Food Quality and
Protection Act (FQPA). In its report
‘‘Opportunities to Improve Data Quality
and Children’s Health through the
FQPA’’ issued January 10, 2006, the
Office of Inspector General
recommended that EPA should update
the status of its Science Policy issue
papers. This Federal Register notice
updates the public on the status of one
of those papers. EPA is withdrawing
this policy because EPA has been using
a less resource-intensive and generally
comparable method of analyzing data on
pesticide residues.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60113
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David J. Miller, Health Effects Division,
Office of Pesticide Programs (7509P),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 305-5352; fax number: (703) 3055147; e-mail address:
miller.davidj@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
This action is directed to the public
in general. This action, however, may be
of interest to persons who produce or
formulate pesticides or who register
pesticide products. Since other entities
may also be interested, the Agency has
not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this
action. 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 Copies of this
Document and Other Related
Information?
1. Docket. EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2008–0935. Publicly available
docket materials are available either in
the electronic docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the Office of
Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory
Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are
from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is (703) 305-5805.
2. Electronic access. You may access
this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet
under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at
https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.
II. Discussion
A. Background on the Food Quality
Protection Act of 1996
The Food Quality Protection Act of
1996 (FQPA) significantly amended the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA). Among other changes, FQPA
established a stringent health-based
standard (‘‘a reasonable certainty of no
harm’’) for pesticide residues in foods to
assure protection from unacceptable
pesticide exposure and strengthened
E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM
29SEN1
60114
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 / Notices
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
health protections for infants and
children from pesticide risks.
During 1998 and 1999, EPA and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
established a subcommittee of the
National Advisory Council for
Environmental Policy and Technology
(NACEPT), the Tolerance Reassessment
Advisory Committee (TRAC), to address
FFDCA issues and implementation.
TRAC comprised more than 50
representatives of affected user,
producer, consumer, public health,
environmental, states, and other
interested groups. The TRAC met from
May 27, 1998, through April 29, 1999.
As a result of the 1998 and 1999
TRAC process, EPA decided that the
FQPA implementation process and
related policies would benefit from
providing notice and comment on the
major science policy issues. The TRAC
identified nine science policy areas it
believed were key to implementation of
tolerance reassessment. EPA agreed to
provide an opportunity for public
comment on each of the nine issues by
announcing their availability in the
Federal Register. In a notice published
in the Federal Register of October 29,
1998 (63 FR 58038) (FRL–6041–5), EPA
described its intended approach. Since
then, EPA has issued a series of draft
and revised documents concerning the
nine science policy issues. Publication
of today’s notice is intended to update
the public on the status of the science
paper ‘‘Use of the Pesticide Data
Program (PDP) in Acute Risk
Assessment.’’
B. EPA’s Use of a Decomposition
Methodology for Acute Dietary Risk
Assessment
In May 1999, EPA published the
policy paper ‘‘Use of the Pesticide Data
Program (PDP) in Acute Risk
Assessment’’ (https://www.epa.gov/
fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1999/May/Day-26/
p13034.htm) for public comment. This
science policy document was developed
to explain a particular statistical
methodology, known as decomposition,
for using information from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA)
PDP in risk assessments of acute
exposure to pesticide residues in food.
The PDP tests commodities in the U.S.
food supply for pesticide residues. The
decompositing methodology consists of
extrapolating from data on pesticide
residues in composite samples of fruits
and vegetables to residue levels in
single units of fruits and vegetables.
Prior to publishing this policy, EPA
policy did not use PDP residue data in
acute dietary exposure assessments
because of a concern that using these
composite results could produce
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Sep 28, 2010
Jkt 220001
exposure estimates that would be biased
low, underestimating high-end pesticide
residues, and therefore would be
inappropriate for human health risk
assessments. Using a decompositing
methodology could address these
concerns.
OPP consulted the FIFRA Scientific
Advisory Panel (SAP) in 1999 and 2000
on a variety of decomposition
methodologies and technical issues
surrounding the use of those
methodologies. The SAP reports from
those meetings are available at: https://
www.epa.gov/scipoly/SAP/meetings/
1999/may/final.pdf and https://
www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/meetings/
2000/february/
partialfinalreport06292000.pdf. The
SAP recommended that the Agency use
decompositing and stated that ‘‘for acute
dietary exposure estimation, it is the
residues in single items of produce that
are of interest rather than ‘‘average’’
residues measured in composited
samples.’’ The Panel concluded that
overall, a methodology called MaxLIP
was the preferred method, but
recommended additional studies and
validation using actual individual
samples of residues to develop a more
complete understanding of methods of
analysis.
For a time, OPP incorporated
decomposition into risk assessment of
acute exposure to pesticide residues in
food. However, due to the timeconsuming nature of the analysis,
combined with the perception that
utilizing decomposition was not making
much of a difference in terms of risk
estimates, the practice was
discontinued. OPP has continued to
evaluate the impact of conducting acute
dietary risk assessments using residue
levels measured in composite samples
versus residue levels estimated to be
present in decomposited samples. The
key question has been the degree to
which use of composite samples may
underestimate risk at the high end of the
exposure distribution. This assessment,
though still exploratory, confirms OPP’s
initial impression that decomposition
does not have a critical influence on the
risk assessment. While, as expected, the
results vary for each pesticidecommodity combination, findings
suggest that use of composite residues
may result in estimated exposures that
are reasonably similar to those resulting
from single-units (i.e., decomposited
results).
III. International Interest in Working
Together on Dietary Risk Assessment
Analysis
EPA’s evaluation of the impact of
decompositing is ongoing. Currently,
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
EPA is in the process of comparing
results from the decomposition
methodology to a method known as the
‘‘variability factor’’ used in other
countries, including the member States
in the European Union. EPA anticipates
working collaboratively with the
European Union, through the European
Food Safety Authority (EFSA), to share
data, to better characterize the
differences between the two
methodologies, and to better understand
the risk assessment and risk
management implications. EPA believes
that seeking to develop a globally
harmonized approach in this aspect of
dietary risk assessment will benefit all
involved by increasing understanding
and facilitating the sharing of data as
well as the assessments derived from
those data. In addition, the process will
facilitate better understanding and
resolutions of trade questions and issues
that may result from differences in
approach.
IV. Withdrawing this Science Policy is
Responsive to EPA’s Office of Inspector
General’s Recommendations
This action is responsive to the
recommendations made by EPA’s Office
of Inspector General during its review of
EPA’s implementation of FQPA. In its
report ‘‘Opportunities to Improve Data
Quality and Children’s Health through
the FQPA’’ issued January 10, 2006,
https://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2006/
20060110-2006-P-00009.pdf, the Office
of Inspector General recommended that
EPA should update the status of its
Science Policy issue papers. This
Federal Register notice updates the
public on the status of one of the
Science Policy papers.
List of Subjects
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests.
Dated: September 22, 2010.
Steve A. Owens,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2010–24307 Filed 9–28–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0248; FRL–8845–9]
Notice of Receipt of Requests for
Amendments to Delete Uses in Certain
Pesticide Registrations
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM
29SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60113-60114]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24307]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0935; FRL-8804-7]
Pesticide Science Policy; Notice of Withdrawal
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA announces the withdrawal of the pesticide science policy
document ``Use of the Pesticide Data Program (PDP) in Acute Risk
Assessment.'' In estimating dietary exposure to pesticides, the Agency
uses a variety of data and different models. This science policy
document was developed to explain a particular statistical methodology,
known as decomposition, for using information from the U.S. Department
of Agriculture's (USDA) Pesticide Data Program (PDP) in risk
assessments of acute exposure to pesticide residues in food. EPA is
withdrawing this policy because EPA has been using a less resource-
intensive and generally comparable method of analyzing data on
pesticide residues. This action is in response to the recommendations
made by EPA's Office of Inspector General during its review of EPA's
implementation of the Food Quality and Protection Act (FQPA). In its
report ``Opportunities to Improve Data Quality and Children's Health
through the FQPA'' issued January 10, 2006, the Office of Inspector
General recommended that EPA should update the status of its Science
Policy issue papers. This Federal Register notice updates the public on
the status of one of those papers. EPA is withdrawing this policy
because EPA has been using a less resource-intensive and generally
comparable method of analyzing data on pesticide residues.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David J. Miller, Health Effects
Division, Office of Pesticide Programs (7509P), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number: (703) 305-5352; fax number: (703) 305-5147; e-
mail address: miller.davidj@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
This action is directed to the public in general. This action,
however, may be of interest to persons who produce or formulate
pesticides or who register pesticide products. Since other entities may
also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the
specific entities that may be affected by this action. 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 Copies of this Document and Other Related
Information?
1. Docket. EPA has established a docket for this action under
docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0935. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal
Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are
from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.
II. Discussion
A. Background on the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996
The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) significantly
amended the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). Among other
changes, FQPA established a stringent health-based standard (``a
reasonable certainty of no harm'') for pesticide residues in foods to
assure protection from unacceptable pesticide exposure and strengthened
[[Page 60114]]
health protections for infants and children from pesticide risks.
During 1998 and 1999, EPA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) established a subcommittee of the National Advisory Council for
Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT), the Tolerance
Reassessment Advisory Committee (TRAC), to address FFDCA issues and
implementation. TRAC comprised more than 50 representatives of affected
user, producer, consumer, public health, environmental, states, and
other interested groups. The TRAC met from May 27, 1998, through April
29, 1999.
As a result of the 1998 and 1999 TRAC process, EPA decided that the
FQPA implementation process and related policies would benefit from
providing notice and comment on the major science policy issues. The
TRAC identified nine science policy areas it believed were key to
implementation of tolerance reassessment. EPA agreed to provide an
opportunity for public comment on each of the nine issues by announcing
their availability in the Federal Register. In a notice published in
the Federal Register of October 29, 1998 (63 FR 58038) (FRL-6041-5),
EPA described its intended approach. Since then, EPA has issued a
series of draft and revised documents concerning the nine science
policy issues. Publication of today's notice is intended to update the
public on the status of the science paper ``Use of the Pesticide Data
Program (PDP) in Acute Risk Assessment.''
B. EPA's Use of a Decomposition Methodology for Acute Dietary Risk
Assessment
In May 1999, EPA published the policy paper ``Use of the Pesticide
Data Program (PDP) in Acute Risk Assessment'' (https://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1999/May/Day-26/p13034.htm) for public comment. This
science policy document was developed to explain a particular
statistical methodology, known as decomposition, for using information
from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) PDP in risk
assessments of acute exposure to pesticide residues in food. The PDP
tests commodities in the U.S. food supply for pesticide residues. The
decompositing methodology consists of extrapolating from data on
pesticide residues in composite samples of fruits and vegetables to
residue levels in single units of fruits and vegetables.
Prior to publishing this policy, EPA policy did not use PDP residue
data in acute dietary exposure assessments because of a concern that
using these composite results could produce exposure estimates that
would be biased low, underestimating high-end pesticide residues, and
therefore would be inappropriate for human health risk assessments.
Using a decompositing methodology could address these concerns.
OPP consulted the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) in 1999 and
2000 on a variety of decomposition methodologies and technical issues
surrounding the use of those methodologies. The SAP reports from those
meetings are available at: https://www.epa.gov/scipoly/SAP/meetings/1999/may/final.pdf and https://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/meetings/2000/february/partialfinalreport06292000.pdf. The SAP recommended that the
Agency use decompositing and stated that ``for acute dietary exposure
estimation, it is the residues in single items of produce that are of
interest rather than ``average'' residues measured in composited
samples.'' The Panel concluded that overall, a methodology called
MaxLIP was the preferred method, but recommended additional studies and
validation using actual individual samples of residues to develop a
more complete understanding of methods of analysis.
For a time, OPP incorporated decomposition into risk assessment of
acute exposure to pesticide residues in food. However, due to the time-
consuming nature of the analysis, combined with the perception that
utilizing decomposition was not making much of a difference in terms of
risk estimates, the practice was discontinued. OPP has continued to
evaluate the impact of conducting acute dietary risk assessments using
residue levels measured in composite samples versus residue levels
estimated to be present in decomposited samples. The key question has
been the degree to which use of composite samples may underestimate
risk at the high end of the exposure distribution. This assessment,
though still exploratory, confirms OPP's initial impression that
decomposition does not have a critical influence on the risk
assessment. While, as expected, the results vary for each pesticide-
commodity combination, findings suggest that use of composite residues
may result in estimated exposures that are reasonably similar to those
resulting from single-units (i.e., decomposited results).
III. International Interest in Working Together on Dietary Risk
Assessment Analysis
EPA's evaluation of the impact of decompositing is ongoing.
Currently, EPA is in the process of comparing results from the
decomposition methodology to a method known as the ``variability
factor'' used in other countries, including the member States in the
European Union. EPA anticipates working collaboratively with the
European Union, through the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), to
share data, to better characterize the differences between the two
methodologies, and to better understand the risk assessment and risk
management implications. EPA believes that seeking to develop a
globally harmonized approach in this aspect of dietary risk assessment
will benefit all involved by increasing understanding and facilitating
the sharing of data as well as the assessments derived from those data.
In addition, the process will facilitate better understanding and
resolutions of trade questions and issues that may result from
differences in approach.
IV. Withdrawing this Science Policy is Responsive to EPA's Office of
Inspector General's Recommendations
This action is responsive to the recommendations made by EPA's
Office of Inspector General during its review of EPA's implementation
of FQPA. In its report ``Opportunities to Improve Data Quality and
Children's Health through the FQPA'' issued January 10, 2006, https://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2006/20060110-2006-P-00009.pdf, the Office of
Inspector General recommended that EPA should update the status of its
Science Policy issue papers. This Federal Register notice updates the
public on the status of one of the Science Policy papers.
List of Subjects
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests.
Dated: September 22, 2010.
Steve A. Owens,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2010-24307 Filed 9-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S