Flumioxazin; Pesticide Tolerances, 69005-69009 [2010-28132]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
(2) Rule 420, ‘‘Beef Feedlots,’’ adopted
on October 10, 2006.
*
*
*
*
*
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
[FR Doc. 2010–28257 Filed 11–9–10; 8:45 am]
A. Does this action apply to me?
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
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.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0781; FRL–8850–3]
Flumioxazin; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of flumioxazin in
or on the commodity fish, freshwater.
Valent U.S.A. Corporation requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
November 10, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before January 10, 2011, and must
be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2008–0781. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available in the electronic docket at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPP
Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S–
4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket
Facility telephone number is (703) 305–
5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathryn V. Montague, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (703) 305–1243; e-mail address:
montague.kathryn@epa.gov.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:24 Nov 09, 2010
Jkt 223001
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–2008–0781 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 January 10, 2011. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
69005
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–2008–0781, 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 December 3,
2008 (73 FR 73640) (FRL–8390–4), 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 8F7438) by Valent
U.S.A. Corporation, 1600 Riviera
Avenue, Suite 200, Walnut Creek, CA
94596. The petition requested that 40
CFR part 180 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of
the herbicide flumioxazin, 2-[7-fluoro3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2-propynyl)-2H1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]-4,5,6,7-tetrahydro1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione and its
metabolites APF (3-oxo-4-prop-2-ynyl-6amino-7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-1,4benzoxazin) and 482–HA (N-(7-fluoro3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-prop-2-ynyl-2H-1,4benzoxazin-6-yl)cyclohex-1-ene-1carboxamide-2-carboxylic acid) in or on
commodity fish, freshwater at 1.5 parts
per million (ppm). That notice
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Valent U.S.A. Corporation,
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
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
69006
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
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 flumioxazin
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with flumioxazin 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.
Flumioxazin has mild or no acute
toxicity when administered via the oral,
dermal and inhalation routes of
exposure. It has little or no toxicity with
respect to eye or skin irritation and is
not a dermal sensitizer. Sub-chronic and
chronic toxicity studies demonstrated
that the key toxic effects associated with
flumioxazin include anemia and
impacts on the liver and the
cardiovascular system. Hematologic
(hematopoietic) effects of anemia were
noted in rats, including alterations in
hemoglobin parameters. Increased
absolute and relative liver weights and/
or increased alkaline phosphatase
values were observed in dogs.
There was no evidence (quantitative
or qualitative) of susceptibility
following in-utero oral exposure in
rabbits. Developmental studies in the rat
resulted in cardiovascular anomalies,
including ventricular septal defects. In
the 2-generation reproduction study,
systemic effects (clinical signs and
mortality as well as a decrease in body
weight/gain and food consumption)
were noted in males and females; more
severe offspring effects (decrease in the
number of live born and decreased pup
body weights) were noted at lower doses
than that which resulted in parental
effects.
None of the acute, sub-chronic,
chronic, developmental or reproduction
studies indicated an effect on the
nervous systems. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in mice and
rats, flumioxazin is classified as ‘‘not
likely to be carcinogenic to humans.’’
Flumioxazin did not induce significant
increases in any tumor type in either
rats or mice under the conditions of the
studies, and it did not induce any
mutagenic activity in the required
battery of mutagenicity studies.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by flumioxazin as well as
the no observed adverse effect level
(NOAEL) and the lowest observed
adverse effect level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document
‘‘Flumioxazin. Human Health Risk
Assessment for a Proposed Aquatic
Use,’’ pp. 49 to 56 in docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0781.
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 the NOAEL and LOAEL
of concern are identified. Uncertainty/
safety factors (UFS) 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 nonthreshold 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:24 Nov 09, 2010
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for flumioxazin used for
human risk assessment can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov in document
‘‘Flumioxazin. Human Health Risk
Assessment for a Proposed Aquatic
Use,’’ pp. 25 to 26 in docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0781.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to flumioxazin, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing flumioxazin tolerances in 40
CFR 180.568. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from flumioxazin 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 effect was identified
for the general population. However,
EPA identified potential acute effects
(cardiovascular effects in offspring) for
the population subgroup, females 13 to
49 years old.
In estimating acute dietary exposure,
EPA used food consumption
information from the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1994–1996 and 1998 Nationwide
Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels
in food, EPA used tolerance-level
residues, dietary exposure evaluation
model (DEEM) default processing
factors for all processed commodities
(with the exception of tomato, which
used the empirical processing factor of
1x), and assumed 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) for all proposed
commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998
CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA
used tolerance-level residues, DEEM
default processing factors for all
processed commodities (with the
exception of tomato, which used the
empirical processing factor of 1x), and
assumed 100 PCT for all proposed
commodities.
iii. Cancer. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
EPA has classified flumioxazin as ‘‘not
likely to be carcinogenic to humans.’’
Therefore, a quantitative exposure
assessment to evaluate cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA did not use
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for flumioxazin. Tolerance level
residues and/or 100 PCT were assumed
for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) of flumioxazin,
482–HA, APF and THPA degradates for
acute exposures are 400 parts per billion
(ppb) flumioxazin, at day zero and
estimated to be 10.4 ppb, 1.6 ppb, and
110.1 ppb for flumioxazin, 482–HA and
APF degradates, respectively, at day 30
for surface water. For chronic exposures
for non-cancer assessments, the EDWCs
of 482–HA and APF are estimated to be
4.84 ppb and 12.85 ppb, respectively,
for surface water. Based on the
Screening Concentration in Ground
Water (SCI–GROW) model, for both
acute and chronic (non-cancer)
exposures, the EDWCs of 482–HA and
APF are estimated to be 45.27 ppb and
2.66 ppb, respectively, for ground water.
EDWCs of flumioxazin are estimated to
be negligible in both surface and ground
water for chronic exposures.
The estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. The
peak day zero of 0.40 ppm for
flumioxazin was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water for the
acute dietary risk assessment, and the
day 30 total of 0.142 ppm for
flumioxazin, 482–HA and APF
degradates was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water for the
chronic dietary risk assessment.
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).
Flumioxazin is currently registered for
use in the following areas that could
result in residential exposures:
Walkways, parking lots and non-grassy
areas around residential dwellings. EPA
assessed residential exposure using the
following assumptions: Short-term
dermal and inhalation exposure to adult
handlers resulting from the use of
flumioxazin within residential settings.
For the above use sites, no postapplication exposure to adults or
children from flumioxazin is expected.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:24 Nov 09, 2010
Jkt 223001
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found flumioxazin to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
flumioxazin does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that flumioxazin 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 Web site at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
The prenatal and postnatal toxicology
database for flumioxazin includes rat
and rabbit prenatal developmental
toxicity studies and a 2-generation
reproduction toxicity study in rats.
There is no evidence of increased
susceptibility following in-utero oral
exposure in rabbits; however, there is
evidence of increased quantitative
susceptibility of rat fetuses to in-utero
exposure to flumioxazin in the oral and
dermal developmental studies. In both
studies, there was an increased
incidence in fetal cardiovascular
anomalies (including ventricular septal
defects) in the absence of maternal
toxicity. Additionally, quantitative
susceptibility was observed in the 2generation rat reproduction study, in
which offspring effects (decrease in the
number of live born and decreased pup
body weights) were observed at lower
doses than those which caused parental/
systemic toxicity (red substance in
vagina and increased mortality in
females as well as decreases in male and
female body weights, body weight gains
and food consumption).
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
69007
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for
flumioxazin is complete except for
immunotoxicity, acute neurotoxicity,
and sub-chronic neurotoxicity testing.
Recent changes to 40 CFR part 158 make
acute and sub-chronic neurotoxicity
testing (OPPTS Test Guideline
870.6200), and immunotoxicity testing
(OPPTS Test Guideline 870.7800)
required for pesticide registration;
however, the existing data are sufficient
for endpoint selection for exposure/risk
assessment scenarios, and for evaluation
of the requirements under the FQPA.
The available data for flumioxazin do
not show the potential for neurotoxic
effects. In the sub-chronic and chronic
toxicity studies, signs of anemia (a
potential immunotoxic effect) were
observed. In the rat, hematologic
(hematopoietic) effects of anemia were
noted, including alterations in
hemoglobin parameters. Flumioxazin is
a protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO)
inhibitor, which inhibits the
biosynthesis of chlorophyll in plants
(giving flumioxazin its weed-control
properties). In animals, PPO is
responsible for one of the later steps in
heme synthesis; therefore, the inhibition
of PPO results in anemia. Although
anemia can potentially be considered an
immunotoxic effect, in this case it is
likely the anemia is due to the inhibited
heme formation (which can interfere
with the porphyrin component of heme,
a hematopoietic effect resulting in
anemia), and the blood effects are not
considered to be the result of potential
immunotoxicity. Thus, EPA has
concluded that flumioxazin does not
directly impact the nervous system or
directly target the immune system. The
Agency does not believe that conducting
a functional immunotoxicity study will
result in a NOAEL lower than the
regulatory dose for risk assessment;
therefore, an additional database
uncertainty factor is not needed to
account for potential immunotoxicity or
neurotoxicity.
ii. There is no indication that
flumioxazin is a neurotoxic chemical
and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional uncertainty factors (UFs) to
account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is evidence of increased
quantitative susceptibility of the young
following exposure to flumioxazin in
the oral and dermal developmental
toxicity studies in the rat and in the 2generation rat reproduction study;
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
69008
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
therefore, a degree of concern analysis
was performed to determine the level of
concern for the effects observed when
considered in the context of all available
toxicity data and to identify any
residual concerns after establishing
toxicity endpoints and traditional
uncertainty/safety factor to be used in
the flumioxazin risk assessment. In
considering the overall toxicity profile
and the endpoints and doses selected
for the flumioxazin risk assessment,
EPA characterized the degree of concern
for the susceptibility observed in the rat
developmental and 2-generation
reproductive studies as low and
determined that there are no residual
uncertainties for prenatal and/or
postnatal toxicity because:
a. The only missing toxicity data for
flumioxazin are the newly required
neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity
studies; however, no additional
uncertainty/safety factor is needed in
the absence of these studies because
there is no evidence to indicate that
flumioxazin targets the nervous system
or the immune system. Further, EPA has
concluded a developmental
neurotoxicity study is not required.
b. There are clear NOAELs and
LOAELs for the developmental and
offspring effects noted in the rat
developmental toxicity and 2-generation
reproductive toxicity studies, and the
doses and endpoints have been selected
from these studies for risk assessment
for the relevant exposed populations,
i.e., pregnant females and children (with
the exception of the chronic dietary
endpoint, for which a chronic study was
chosen for endpoint selection).
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on conservative
assumptions, including 100 PCT data
and tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to flumioxazin
in drinking water. EPA used similarly
conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure of children as well
as incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
Post-application exposure to children is
not expected. These assessments will
not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by flumioxazin.
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 aPAD and cPAD. For
linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the
lifetime probability of acquiring cancer
given the estimated aggregate exposure.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:24 Nov 09, 2010
Jkt 223001
Short-term intermediate-term, and
chronic-term risks are evaluated by
comparing the estimated aggregate food,
water, and residential exposure to the
appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to
flumioxazin will occupy 66% of the
aPAD for females 13–49 years old, the
population subgroup where a potential
acute risk was identified.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to flumioxazin
from food and water will utilize 51% of
the cPAD for all infants less than 1 year
old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the
explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic
residential exposure to residues of
flumioxazin is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
Flumioxazin is currently registered
for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency
has determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with short-term residential
exposures to flumioxazin.
Using the exposure assumptions
described at https://www.regulations.gov
in document ‘‘Flumioxazin. Human
Health Risk Assessment for a Proposed
Aquatic Use,’’ pp. 33 to 46 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0781 for
short-term exposures from adult
application of flumioxazin to residential
walkways, parking lots and non-grassy
areas and children and adults
swimming in treated water, EPA has
concluded the combined short-term
food, water, and residential exposures
results in aggregate MOEs of 690 for
adults and 470 for children. Because
EPA’s level of concern for flumioxazin
is a MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs
are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Intermediate-term aggregate risks are
identical to the short-term aggregate
risks, since endpoints for short-term and
intermediate-term risk assessments are
the same, and since residential exposure
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
durations are expected to be short-term
in nature.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
flumioxazin 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 flumioxazin
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
The following adequate enforcement
methodology is available to enforce the
tolerance expression: A gas
chromatography/nitrogen-phosphorus
detection (GC/NPD) method. The
method may be requested from: Chief,
Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;
telephone number: (410) 305–2905; email address: residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N.
Food and Agriculture Organization/
World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized
as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade
agreements to which the United States
is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance
that is different from a Codex MRL;
however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4)
requires that EPA explain the reasons
for departing from the Codex level.
There are no Codex, Canadian or
Mexican maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established for residues of
flumioxazin on commodities associated
with this petition.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of herbicide flumioxazin, 2[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2propynyl)-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)dione and its metabolites APF (3-oxo-4prop-2-ynyl-6-amino-7-fluoro-3,4dihydro-1,4-benzoxazin) and 482-HA
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
(N-(7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-prop-2ynyl-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl)cyclohex1-ene-1-carboxamide-2-carboxylic acid),
in or on fish, freshwater at 1.5 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:24 Nov 09, 2010
Jkt 223001
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) (Pub. L. 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
ACTION:
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: October 28, 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 180.568 is amended by
alphabetically adding the following
commodity to the table in paragraph (a)
to read as follows:
■
(a) * * *
Parts per
million
*
*
*
Fish, freshwater ....................
PO 00000
*
*
Frm 00069
*
Fmt 4700
*
*
1.5
*
Sfmt 4700
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2010–28132 Filed 11–9–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
48 CFR Parts 919, 922, 923, 924, 925,
926, and 952
RIN 1991–AB87
Acquisition Regulation:
Socioeconomic Programs
Department of Energy.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Department of Energy
(DOE) is amending the Department of
Energy Acquisition Regulation (DEAR)
Socioeconomic Programs to make
changes to conform to the Federal
Acquisition Regulation (FAR), remove
out-of-date coverage, and update
references. Today’s rule does not alter
substantive rights or obligations under
current law.
DATES: Effective Date: December 10,
2010.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barbara Binney at (202) 287–1340 or by
e-mail, barbara.binney@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Comments and Responses
III. Procedural Requirements
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under Executive Order 12988
C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act
D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act
E. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act
F. Review Under Executive Order 13132
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 13211
J. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
K. Review Under the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996
L. Approval by the Office of the Secretary
of Energy
I. Background
§ 180.568 Flumioxazin; tolerances for
residues.
Commodity
*
69009
*
This final rule amends the existing
Department of Energy Acquisition
Regulation (DEAR) Subchapter D—
Socioeconomic Programs. The purpose
of this rule is to update DEAR
Subchapter D—Socioeconomic
Programs to conform it to the FAR.
Changes are to DEAR parts 919, 922,
923, 925, 926, and 952. A new part 924
is added to the DEAR. There are no
DEAR parts 920 or 921. DEAR parts 919
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 217 (Wednesday, November 10, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69005-69009]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28132]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0781; FRL-8850-3]
Flumioxazin; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
flumioxazin in or on the commodity fish, freshwater. Valent U.S.A.
Corporation requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective November 10, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before January 10, 2011,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0781. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at https://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic
docket at https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn V. Montague, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number: (703) 305-1243; e-mail address:
montague.kathryn@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-2008-0781 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
January 10, 2011. 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-2008-0781, 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 December 3, 2008 (73 FR 73640) (FRL-
8390-4), 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
8F7438) by Valent U.S.A. Corporation, 1600 Riviera Avenue, Suite 200,
Walnut Creek, CA 94596. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be
amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide
flumioxazin, 2-[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2-propynyl)-2H-1,4-
benzoxazin-6-yl]-4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione and its
metabolites APF (3-oxo-4-prop-2-ynyl-6-amino-7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-1,4-
benzoxazin) and 482-HA (N-(7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-prop-2-ynyl-2H-
1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl)cyclohex-1-ene-1-carboxamide-2-carboxylic acid) in
or on commodity fish, freshwater at 1.5 parts per million (ppm). That
notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Valent U.S.A.
Corporation, 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
[[Page 69006]]
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 flumioxazin including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with flumioxazin
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.
Flumioxazin has mild or no acute toxicity when administered via the
oral, dermal and inhalation routes of exposure. It has little or no
toxicity with respect to eye or skin irritation and is not a dermal
sensitizer. Sub-chronic and chronic toxicity studies demonstrated that
the key toxic effects associated with flumioxazin include anemia and
impacts on the liver and the cardiovascular system. Hematologic
(hematopoietic) effects of anemia were noted in rats, including
alterations in hemoglobin parameters. Increased absolute and relative
liver weights and/or increased alkaline phosphatase values were
observed in dogs.
There was no evidence (quantitative or qualitative) of
susceptibility following in-utero oral exposure in rabbits.
Developmental studies in the rat resulted in cardiovascular anomalies,
including ventricular septal defects. In the 2-generation reproduction
study, systemic effects (clinical signs and mortality as well as a
decrease in body weight/gain and food consumption) were noted in males
and females; more severe offspring effects (decrease in the number of
live born and decreased pup body weights) were noted at lower doses
than that which resulted in parental effects.
None of the acute, sub-chronic, chronic, developmental or
reproduction studies indicated an effect on the nervous systems. Based
on the lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in mice and rats,
flumioxazin is classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to
humans.'' Flumioxazin did not induce significant increases in any tumor
type in either rats or mice under the conditions of the studies, and it
did not induce any mutagenic activity in the required battery of
mutagenicity studies.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by flumioxazin as well as the no observed
adverse effect level (NOAEL) and the lowest observed adverse effect
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document ``Flumioxazin. Human Health Risk
Assessment for a Proposed Aquatic Use,'' pp. 49 to 56 in docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0781.
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 the NOAEL and LOAEL of concern are
identified. Uncertainty/safety factors (UFS) 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 flumioxazin used for
human risk assessment can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in
document ``Flumioxazin. Human Health Risk Assessment for a Proposed
Aquatic Use,'' pp. 25 to 26 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0781.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to flumioxazin, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing flumioxazin tolerances in 40 CFR
180.568. EPA assessed dietary exposures from flumioxazin 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 effect was
identified for the general population. However, EPA identified
potential acute effects (cardiovascular effects in offspring) for the
population subgroup, females 13 to 49 years old.
In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1994-1996 and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food, EPA used tolerance-
level residues, dietary exposure evaluation model (DEEM) default
processing factors for all processed commodities (with the exception of
tomato, which used the empirical processing factor of 1x), and assumed
100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all proposed commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA used tolerance-level
residues, DEEM default processing factors for all processed commodities
(with the exception of tomato, which used the empirical processing
factor of 1x), and assumed 100 PCT for all proposed commodities.
iii. Cancer. Based on the lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in
two adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies, EPA has classified
flumioxazin as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.'' Therefore,
a quantitative exposure assessment to evaluate cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
[[Page 69007]]
anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the dietary assessment
for flumioxazin. Tolerance level residues and/or 100 PCT were assumed
for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of flumioxazin, 482-HA, APF and THPA
degradates for acute exposures are 400 parts per billion (ppb)
flumioxazin, at day zero and estimated to be 10.4 ppb, 1.6 ppb, and
110.1 ppb for flumioxazin, 482-HA and APF degradates, respectively, at
day 30 for surface water. For chronic exposures for non-cancer
assessments, the EDWCs of 482-HA and APF are estimated to be 4.84 ppb
and 12.85 ppb, respectively, for surface water. Based on the Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) model, for both acute and
chronic (non-cancer) exposures, the EDWCs of 482-HA and APF are
estimated to be 45.27 ppb and 2.66 ppb, respectively, for ground water.
EDWCs of flumioxazin are estimated to be negligible in both surface and
ground water for chronic exposures.
The estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. The peak day zero of 0.40 ppm
for flumioxazin was used to assess the contribution to drinking water
for the acute dietary risk assessment, and the day 30 total of 0.142
ppm for flumioxazin, 482-HA and APF degradates was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water for the chronic dietary risk assessment.
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). Flumioxazin is
currently registered for use in the following areas that could result
in residential exposures: Walkways, parking lots and non-grassy areas
around residential dwellings. EPA assessed residential exposure using
the following assumptions: Short-term dermal and inhalation exposure to
adult handlers resulting from the use of flumioxazin within residential
settings. For the above use sites, no post-application exposure to
adults or children from flumioxazin is expected.
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 flumioxazin to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and flumioxazin does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
flumioxazin 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 Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The prenatal and postnatal
toxicology database for flumioxazin includes rat and rabbit prenatal
developmental toxicity studies and a 2-generation reproduction toxicity
study in rats. There is no evidence of increased susceptibility
following in-utero oral exposure in rabbits; however, there is evidence
of increased quantitative susceptibility of rat fetuses to in-utero
exposure to flumioxazin in the oral and dermal developmental studies.
In both studies, there was an increased incidence in fetal
cardiovascular anomalies (including ventricular septal defects) in the
absence of maternal toxicity. Additionally, quantitative susceptibility
was observed in the 2-generation rat reproduction study, in which
offspring effects (decrease in the number of live born and decreased
pup body weights) were observed at lower doses than those which caused
parental/systemic toxicity (red substance in vagina and increased
mortality in females as well as decreases in male and female body
weights, body weight gains and food consumption).
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for flumioxazin is complete except for
immunotoxicity, acute neurotoxicity, and sub-chronic neurotoxicity
testing. Recent changes to 40 CFR part 158 make acute and sub-chronic
neurotoxicity testing (OPPTS Test Guideline 870.6200), and
immunotoxicity testing (OPPTS Test Guideline 870.7800) required for
pesticide registration; however, the existing data are sufficient for
endpoint selection for exposure/risk assessment scenarios, and for
evaluation of the requirements under the FQPA.
The available data for flumioxazin do not show the potential for
neurotoxic effects. In the sub-chronic and chronic toxicity studies,
signs of anemia (a potential immunotoxic effect) were observed. In the
rat, hematologic (hematopoietic) effects of anemia were noted,
including alterations in hemoglobin parameters. Flumioxazin is a
protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO) inhibitor, which inhibits the
biosynthesis of chlorophyll in plants (giving flumioxazin its weed-
control properties). In animals, PPO is responsible for one of the
later steps in heme synthesis; therefore, the inhibition of PPO results
in anemia. Although anemia can potentially be considered an immunotoxic
effect, in this case it is likely the anemia is due to the inhibited
heme formation (which can interfere with the porphyrin component of
heme, a hematopoietic effect resulting in anemia), and the blood
effects are not considered to be the result of potential
immunotoxicity. Thus, EPA has concluded that flumioxazin does not
directly impact the nervous system or directly target the immune
system. The Agency does not believe that conducting a functional
immunotoxicity study will result in a NOAEL lower than the regulatory
dose for risk assessment; therefore, an additional database uncertainty
factor is not needed to account for potential immunotoxicity or
neurotoxicity.
ii. There is no indication that flumioxazin is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional uncertainty factors (UFs) to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is evidence of increased quantitative susceptibility of
the young following exposure to flumioxazin in the oral and dermal
developmental toxicity studies in the rat and in the 2-generation rat
reproduction study;
[[Page 69008]]
therefore, a degree of concern analysis was performed to determine the
level of concern for the effects observed when considered in the
context of all available toxicity data and to identify any residual
concerns after establishing toxicity endpoints and traditional
uncertainty/safety factor to be used in the flumioxazin risk
assessment. In considering the overall toxicity profile and the
endpoints and doses selected for the flumioxazin risk assessment, EPA
characterized the degree of concern for the susceptibility observed in
the rat developmental and 2-generation reproductive studies as low and
determined that there are no residual uncertainties for prenatal and/or
postnatal toxicity because:
a. The only missing toxicity data for flumioxazin are the newly
required neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity studies; however, no
additional uncertainty/safety factor is needed in the absence of these
studies because there is no evidence to indicate that flumioxazin
targets the nervous system or the immune system. Further, EPA has
concluded a developmental neurotoxicity study is not required.
b. There are clear NOAELs and LOAELs for the developmental and
offspring effects noted in the rat developmental toxicity and 2-
generation reproductive toxicity studies, and the doses and endpoints
have been selected from these studies for risk assessment for the
relevant exposed populations, i.e., pregnant females and children (with
the exception of the chronic dietary endpoint, for which a chronic
study was chosen for endpoint selection).
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on conservative assumptions, including 100 PCT data and tolerance-level
residues. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground
and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to flumioxazin in
drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative assumptions to assess
post-application exposure of children as well as incidental oral
exposure of toddlers. Post-application exposure to children is not
expected. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by flumioxazin.
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
aPAD and cPAD. For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the estimated aggregate exposure.
Short-term intermediate-term, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by
comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, and residential exposure
to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to flumioxazin will occupy 66% of the aPAD for females 13-49 years old,
the population subgroup where a potential acute risk was identified.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
flumioxazin from food and water will utilize 51% of the cPAD for all
infants less than 1 year old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
flumioxazin is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
Flumioxazin is currently registered for uses that could result in
short-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it
is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water
with short-term residential exposures to flumioxazin.
Using the exposure assumptions described at https://www.regulations.gov in document ``Flumioxazin. Human Health Risk
Assessment for a Proposed Aquatic Use,'' pp. 33 to 46 in docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0781 for short-term exposures from adult
application of flumioxazin to residential walkways, parking lots and
non-grassy areas and children and adults swimming in treated water, EPA
has concluded the combined short-term food, water, and residential
exposures results in aggregate MOEs of 690 for adults and 470 for
children. Because EPA's level of concern for flumioxazin is a MOE of
100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
Intermediate-term aggregate risks are identical to the short-term
aggregate risks, since endpoints for short-term and intermediate-term
risk assessments are the same, and since residential exposure durations
are expected to be short-term in nature.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, flumioxazin 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 flumioxazin residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
The following adequate enforcement methodology is available to
enforce the tolerance expression: A gas chromatography/nitrogen-
phosphorus detection (GC/NPD) method. The method may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905;
e-mail address: residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. Food and
Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards
program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
There are no Codex, Canadian or Mexican maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established for residues of flumioxazin on commodities
associated with this petition.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of herbicide
flumioxazin, 2-[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2-propynyl)-2H-1,4-
benzoxazin-6-yl]-4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione and its
metabolites APF (3-oxo-4-prop-2-ynyl-6-amino-7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-1,4-
benzoxazin) and 482-HA
[[Page 69009]]
(N-(7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-prop-2-ynyl-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-
yl)cyclohex-1-ene-1-carboxamide-2-carboxylic acid), in or on fish,
freshwater at 1.5 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 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: October 28, 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 180.568 is amended by alphabetically adding the following
commodity to the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.568 Flumioxazin; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Fish, freshwater........................................ 1.5
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-28132 Filed 11-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P