Metrafenone; Pesticide Tolerances, 75389-75393 [2010-30363]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 232 / Friday, December 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Nothing in this section shall affect the
application of any Federal tax law.
§ 1807.908
Fraud, waste and abuse.
Any person who becomes aware of
the existence or apparent existence of
fraud, waste or abuse of assistance
provided under this part should report
such incidences to the Office of
Inspector General of the U.S.
Department of the Treasury.
Dated: November 24, 2010.
Donna J. Gambrell,
Director, Community Development Financial
Institutions Fund.
[FR Doc. 2010–30303 Filed 12–2–10; 8:45 am]
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington,
VA. The Docket Facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
Docket Facility telephone number is
(703) 305–5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tawanda Maignan, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (703) 308–8050; e-mail
address: maignan.tawanda@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
BILLING CODE 4810–70–P
A. Does this action apply to me?
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0732; FRL–8854–6]
Metrafenone; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of metrafenone
(3-bromo-6-methoxy-2methylphenyl)(2,3,4-trimethoxy-6methylphenyl)methanone in or on
grapes. BASF Corporation requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 3, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 1, 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–2008–0732. 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
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Dec 02, 2010
Jkt 223001
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.
To access the harmonized test
guidelines referenced in this document
electronically, please go https://
www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ‘‘Test
Methods and Guidelines.’’
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
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
75389
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–2008–0732 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 February 1, 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–2008–0732, 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 October 7,
2009 (74 FR 51599) (FRL–8792–7), EPA
issued a notice pursuant to section
408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 8F7371) by BASF
Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, P.O. Box
13528, Research Triangle Park, NC
27709. The petition requested that 40
CFR 180.624 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of
the fungicide metrafenone, (3-bromo-6methoxy-2-methylphenyl)(2,3,4trimethoxy-6-methylphenyl)
methanone, in or on table and wine
grapes at 4.5 parts per million (ppm),
juice grapes at 0.45 ppm, and raisin
grapes at 17 ppm. That notice
E:\FR\FM\03DER1.SGM
03DER1
75390
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 232 / Friday, December 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by BASF 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.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has
determined that the proposed tolerances
for wine and juice grapes are not
needed. The reason for this change is
explained in Unit IV.D.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. * * *’’
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, and the factors specified in
section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for metrafenone
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with metrafenone 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.
Metrafenone has low acute toxicity
via oral, inhalation and dermal routes.
It is not a dermal sensitizer, or a skin or
eye irritant. Subchronic and chronic
studies showed that the liver was the
primary organ affected in toxicity
studies with mice, rats and rabbits,
along with impacts on body weights and
body weight gains. After chronic
durations, the liver and body weight
effects were accompanied by kidney
effects. In the subchronic and chronic
toxicity studies in dogs, no effects were
seen at any dose, up to 500 milligrams/
kilogram/day (mg/kg/day). In
developmental toxicity studies in rats
and rabbits, there were no effects
observed in fetuses at any dose level up
to 700 mg/kg/day in rabbits and 1,000
mg/kg/day in rats. The maternal effects
in the rabbit developmental study
consisted of liver effects as well as
decreased body weight gains and food
consumption. In the rat developmental
toxicity study, no effects were observed
in the maternal animals. In the 2generation reproduction study, there
was no evidence of reproductive effects
or any impacts on the endocrine system.
Effects in parental animals and offspring
consisted of decreased body weights
and body weight gains, and these were
observed at similar doses. In addition,
in the parental animals liver effects and
decreased thymus weights were
observed at the same high doses that
resulted in decreased body weight gains.
Based on a battery of mutagenicity
studies, metrafenone is not considered
to be genotoxic. In accordance with the
EPA’s Final Guidelines for Carcinogen
Risk Assessment (March, 2005),
metrafenone is classified as ‘‘Suggestive
Evidence of Carcinogenicity,’’ and
concluded that human risk to liver
tumorgenesis would not be expected at
exposure levels that do not cause
tumors in mice. The no-observedadverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the
lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level
(LOAEL) selected for the chronic
reference dose (cRfD) are based on
hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity
observed at doses lower than the liver
tumor response dose. Thus, the cRfD is
protective of the cancer effects. The
weight of evidence considerations can
be found in the Federal Register of
September 20, 2006 (71 FR 54915)
(FRL–8093–7).
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by metrafenone as well as
the NOAEL and the LOAEL from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document
Metrafenone: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Foliar Use on Grapes in
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–
0732.
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 the
LOAEL. Uncertainty/safety factors (U/
SF) are used in conjunction with the
POD to calculate a safe exposure level—
generally referred to as a populationadjusted dose (PAD) (a = acute c =
chronic) 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 Metrafenone used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR METRAFENONE FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Exposure/scenario
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety factors
Acute dietary (All populations,
including infants and children).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:09 Dec 02, 2010
RfD, PAD, LOC for risk
assessment
Study and toxicological effects
No appropriate endpoint attributable to a single dose identified.
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\03DER1.SGM
03DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 232 / Friday, December 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
75391
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR METRAFENONE FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT—Continued
Exposure/scenario
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for risk
assessment
Study and toxicological effects
Chronic dietary (All populations,
including infants and children).
NOAEL = 24.9 mg/kg/day .......
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Chronic RfD = 0.249 mg/kg/day
cPAD = 0.249 mg/kg/day
Combined Chronic/Carcinogenicity¥Rat
LOAEL = 260 mg/kg/day based on
hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity in both
sexes.
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation)
Suggestive evidence of carcinogenicity. Quantification of cancer risk using a cancer potency factor is not
required. The chronic reference dose is protective of potential cancer risk.
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population
(intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term risk assessment. UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOC = level of concern.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to metrafenone, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances. EPA assessed
dietary exposures from metrafenone in
food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide,
if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1-day or single
exposure.
No such effects were identified in the
toxicological studies for Metrafenone;
therefore, a quantitative acute dietary
exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the Dietary Exposure
Evaluation Model software with the
Food Commodity Intake Database
(DEEM–FCID, Version 2.03), which
incorporates food consumption data as
reported by respondents in the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1994–1996 and 1998 Nationwide
Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII). No Percent Crop
Treated (PCT) information was
incorporated into the dietary exposure
and risk assessment; it was assumed
that 100 PCT for grapes. As to residue
levels, EPA assumed treated
commodities would contain tolerance
level residues 2X higher than the
proposed tolerances to account for
additional residues of potential concern
with respect to toxicity which were not
included in the proposed tolerance for
enforcement purposes.
iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether
quantitative cancer exposure and risk
assessments are appropriate for a fooduse pesticide based on the weight of the
evidence from cancer studies and other
relevant data. Cancer risk is quantified
using a linear or nonlinear approach. If
sufficient information on the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:09 Dec 02, 2010
Jkt 223001
carcinogenic mode of action is available,
a threshold or non-linear approach is
used and a cancer RfD is calculated
based on an earlier noncancer key event.
If carcinogenic mode of action data are
not available, or if the mode of action
data determines a mutagenic mode of
action, a default linear cancer slope
factor approach is utilized. Based on the
data summarized and referenced in Unit
III.A., EPA has concluded that
metrafenone is classified as ‘‘Suggestive
Evidence of Carcinogenicity.’’ Cancer
risk was assessed using the same
exposure estimates as discussed in Unit
III.C.1.ii.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for metrafenone in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
metrafenone. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir
Screening Tool (FIRST), Pesticide Root
Zone Model/Exposure Analysis
Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS) and
Screening Concentration in Ground
Water (SCI–GROW) models, the
estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) of metrafenone for chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments
are estimated to be 22.82 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.097
ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
chronic (non-cancer) dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 22.82 ppb was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water because
the Tier II PRZM/EXAMS value was
higher than the Tier I FIRST and
groundwater values.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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).
Metrafenone is not registered for any
specific use patterns that would result
in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found metrafenone to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
metrafenone does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that metrafenone 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
E:\FR\FM\03DER1.SGM
03DER1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
75392
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 232 / Friday, December 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA SF. In applying this provision,
EPA either retains the default value of
10X, or uses a different additional safety
factor when reliable data available to
EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There is no evidence of increased
susceptibility following in utero and/or
postnatal exposure in the
developmental toxicity studies in rats or
rabbits, and in the 2-generation rat
reproduction study.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for
metrafenone is complete with the
exception of an immunotoxicity study.
In accordance with the updated 40 CFR
part 158 toxicity data requirements for
conventional pesticides, an
immunotoxicity study is required for
metrafenone. EPA has evaluated the
available metrafenone toxicity data to
determine whether an additional UFDB
is needed to account for the lack of the
study. Decreased thymus weight, a
potential immunotoxic effect, was
observed only in adults and solely in a
2-generation reproduction study in rats.
Because this effect was observed in only
one species (rats) in one study, at the
highest dose tested, and the NOAEL for
this effect is 3X higher than the NOAEL
for liver toxicity on which the cPAD is
based, EPA believes the NOAEL for liver
toxicity is protective of this effect, and
an additional UFDB is not needed to
account for potential immunotoxicity.
ii. There is no indication that
metrafenone is a neurotoxic chemical
and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
metrafenone results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were based on assuming 100 PCT and
residues 2X higher than the proposed
tolerance residue levels. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to metrafenone
in drinking water. These assessments
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Dec 02, 2010
Jkt 223001
will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by metrafenone.
from aggregate exposure to metrafenone
residues.
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-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account acute
exposure estimates from dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, metrafenone is not
expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to metrafenone
from food and water will utilize 1% of
the cPAD for the general U.S.
population and 5% of the cPAD for
children 1–2 years old, the population
group receiving the greatest exposure.
There are no residential uses for
metrafenone.
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). Because there is no
residential exposure, metrafenone is not
expected to pose a short-term risk.
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).
Because there is no residential
exposure, metrafenone is not expected
to pose an intermediate-term risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the data
summarized and referenced in Unit
III.A., EPA has concluded that the cRfD/
cPAD for metrafenone is protective of
the cancer effects. As noted above, the
chronic exposure for the general U.S.
population utilizes only 1% of the
cPAD.
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
IV. Other Considerations
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An adequate gas chromatography (GC)
method with electron capture (ECD) and
mass spectrometry (MS) detection,
Method FAMS 105–01, is available to
enforce the tolerance expression for
grapes. However, EPA requires
radiovalidation data for any future
tolerances on other commodities. Such
data were being generated at the time
EPA was reviewing the grape
submission.
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.
The Codex has not established a MRL
for metrafenone. Although there has
been an agreement to harmonize the
proposed grape MRL with Canada, the
MRL has yet to be harmonized between
member states.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
EPA is not establishing the proposed
tolerances for wine and juice grapes.
Tolerances on raw agricultural
commodities (such as grapes) are
applicable to food processed from those
commodities (such as grape juice and
wine). Because the processing data
indicate that residues of metrafenone do
not concentrate in grape juice or wine,
a tolerance on the raw agricultural
commodity is all that is necessary.
EPA is revising the requested
tolerance expression to clarify the
chemical moieties that are covered by
E:\FR\FM\03DER1.SGM
03DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 232 / Friday, December 3, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
the tolerances and specify how
compliance with the tolerances is to be
measured. The revised tolerance
expression makes clear that the
tolerances cover residues of the
fungicide metrafenone, including its
metabolites and degradates, but that
compliance with the specified tolerance
levels is to be determined by measuring
only metrafenone (3-bromo-6-methoxy2-methylphenyl)(2,3,4-trimethoxy-6methylphenyl)methanone in or on the
commodities.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of metrafenone, (3-bromo-6methoxy-2-methylphenyl)(2,3,4trimethoxy-6-methylphenyl)methanone,
in or on grape at 4.5 ppm and grape,
raisin at 17 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:01 Dec 02, 2010
Jkt 223001
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: November 24, 2010.
Steven Bradbury,
Director, 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
75393
2. Section 180.624 paragraph (a) is
revised to read as follows:
■
§ 180.624 Metrafenone; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of the fungicide
metrafenone, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified in the following table is to be
determined by measuring only
metrafenone (3-bromo-6-methoxy-2methylphenyl)(2,3,4-trimethoxy-6methylphenyl)methanone in or on the
following commodities:
Commodity
Parts per million
Grape ..............................
Grape, raisin ...................
*
*
*
*
4.5
17
*
[FR Doc. 2010–30363 Filed 12–2–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 54
[CC Docket No. 02–6, GN Docket No. 09–
51; FCC 10–175]
Schools and Libraries Universal
Service Support Mechanism and A
National Broadband Plan for Our
Future
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) takes another step toward
realizing the National Broadband Plan’s
vision of improving connectivity to
schools and libraries by upgrading and
modernizing the successful E-rate
program. In particular, the Commission
takes action on upgrades that can be
implemented in funding year 2011 (July
1, 2011–June 30, 2012); enables schools
and libraries to better serve students,
teachers, librarians, and their
communities by providing more
flexibility to select and make available
the most cost-effective broadband and
other communications services;
simplifies and streamlines the program;
and improves safeguards against waste,
fraud and abuse. In addition, the
Commission adopts the eligible services
list for funding year 2011.
DATES: Effective January 3, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Regina Brown, Wireline Competition
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\03DER1.SGM
03DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 232 (Friday, December 3, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 75389-75393]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30363]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0732; FRL-8854-6]
Metrafenone; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
metrafenone (3-bromo-6-methoxy-2-methylphenyl)(2,3,4-trimethoxy-6-
methylphenyl)methanone in or on grapes. BASF Corporation requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective December 3, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 1, 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-2008-0732. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at https://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic
docket at https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tawanda Maignan, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 308-8050; e-mail address: maignan.tawanda@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those
engaged in the following activities:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to
provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by
this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in
determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr. To
access the harmonized test guidelines referenced in this document
electronically, please go https://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ``Test
Methods and Guidelines.''
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-2008-0732 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
February 1, 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-2008-0732, 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 October 7, 2009 (74 FR 51599) (FRL-8792-
7), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
8F7371) by BASF Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, P.O. Box 13528, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.624 be
amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide
metrafenone, (3-bromo-6-methoxy-2-methylphenyl)(2,3,4-trimethoxy-6-
methylphenyl) methanone, in or on table and wine grapes at 4.5 parts
per million (ppm), juice grapes at 0.45 ppm, and raisin grapes at 17
ppm. That notice
[[Page 75390]]
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by BASF 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.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
determined that the proposed tolerances for wine and juice grapes are
not needed. The reason for this change is explained in Unit IV.D.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. * *
*''
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure for metrafenone including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with metrafenone
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.
Metrafenone has low acute toxicity via oral, inhalation and dermal
routes. It is not a dermal sensitizer, or a skin or eye irritant.
Subchronic and chronic studies showed that the liver was the primary
organ affected in toxicity studies with mice, rats and rabbits, along
with impacts on body weights and body weight gains. After chronic
durations, the liver and body weight effects were accompanied by kidney
effects. In the subchronic and chronic toxicity studies in dogs, no
effects were seen at any dose, up to 500 milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/
kg/day). In developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits, there
were no effects observed in fetuses at any dose level up to 700 mg/kg/
day in rabbits and 1,000 mg/kg/day in rats. The maternal effects in the
rabbit developmental study consisted of liver effects as well as
decreased body weight gains and food consumption. In the rat
developmental toxicity study, no effects were observed in the maternal
animals. In the 2-generation reproduction study, there was no evidence
of reproductive effects or any impacts on the endocrine system. Effects
in parental animals and offspring consisted of decreased body weights
and body weight gains, and these were observed at similar doses. In
addition, in the parental animals liver effects and decreased thymus
weights were observed at the same high doses that resulted in decreased
body weight gains.
Based on a battery of mutagenicity studies, metrafenone is not
considered to be genotoxic. In accordance with the EPA's Final
Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment (March, 2005), metrafenone is
classified as ``Suggestive Evidence of Carcinogenicity,'' and concluded
that human risk to liver tumorgenesis would not be expected at exposure
levels that do not cause tumors in mice. The no-observed-adverse-
effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level
(LOAEL) selected for the chronic reference dose (cRfD) are based on
hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity observed at doses lower than the
liver tumor response dose. Thus, the cRfD is protective of the cancer
effects. The weight of evidence considerations can be found in the
Federal Register of September 20, 2006 (71 FR 54915) (FRL-8093-7).
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by metrafenone as well as the NOAEL and the
LOAEL from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document Metrafenone: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Foliar Use on Grapes in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2008-0732.
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 the LOAEL. Uncertainty/safety
factors (U/SF) are used in conjunction with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level--generally referred to as a population-adjusted dose
(PAD) (a = acute c = chronic) 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 Metrafenone used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Metrafenone for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure and
Exposure/scenario uncertainty/safety RfD, PAD, LOC for risk Study and toxicological
factors assessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (All populations, No appropriate endpoint attributable to a single dose identified.
including infants and children).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 75391]]
Chronic dietary (All populations,.. NOAEL = 24.9 mg/kg/day Chronic RfD = 0.249 mg/ Combined Chronic/
kg/day. Carcinogenicity-Rat
including infants and children). UFA = 10x cPAD = 0.249 mg/kg/day LOAEL = 260 mg/kg/day
based on
UFH = 10x hepatotoxicity and
nephrotoxicity in both
FQPA SF = 1x sexes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).. Suggestive evidence of carcinogenicity. Quantification of cancer risk using
a cancer potency factor is not required. The chronic reference dose is
protective of potential cancer risk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members
of the human population (intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term
study for long-term risk assessment. UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. FQPA
SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOC = level of concern.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to metrafenone, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances. EPA assessed dietary exposures from metrafenone in food
as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for
Metrafenone; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with
the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID, Version 2.03), which
incorporates food consumption data as reported by respondents in the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1994-1996 and 1998 Nationwide
Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII). No Percent
Crop Treated (PCT) information was incorporated into the dietary
exposure and risk assessment; it was assumed that 100 PCT for grapes.
As to residue levels, EPA assumed treated commodities would contain
tolerance level residues 2X higher than the proposed tolerances to
account for additional residues of potential concern with respect to
toxicity which were not included in the proposed tolerance for
enforcement purposes.
iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether quantitative cancer exposure
and risk assessments are appropriate for a food-use pesticide based on
the weight of the evidence from cancer studies and other relevant data.
Cancer risk is quantified using a linear or nonlinear approach. If
sufficient information on the carcinogenic mode of action is available,
a threshold or non-linear approach is used and a cancer RfD is
calculated based on an earlier noncancer key event. If carcinogenic
mode of action data are not available, or if the mode of action data
determines a mutagenic mode of action, a default linear cancer slope
factor approach is utilized. Based on the data summarized and
referenced in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that metrafenone is
classified as ``Suggestive Evidence of Carcinogenicity.'' Cancer risk
was assessed using the same exposure estimates as discussed in Unit
III.C.1.ii.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for metrafenone in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of metrafenone. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST),
Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/
EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models,
the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of metrafenone for
chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 22.82
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.097 ppb for ground
water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic (non-cancer)
dietary risk assessment, the water concentration of value 22.82 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to drinking water because the Tier II
PRZM/EXAMS value was higher than the Tier I FIRST and groundwater
values.
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).
Metrafenone is not registered for any specific use patterns that
would result in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found metrafenone to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and metrafenone does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
metrafenone 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
[[Page 75392]]
based on reliable data that a different margin of safety will be safe
for infants and children. This additional margin of safety is commonly
referred to as the FQPA SF. In applying this provision, EPA either
retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety
factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a
different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no evidence of
increased susceptibility following in utero and/or postnatal exposure
in the developmental toxicity studies in rats or rabbits, and in the 2-
generation rat reproduction study.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for metrafenone is complete with the
exception of an immunotoxicity study. In accordance with the updated 40
CFR part 158 toxicity data requirements for conventional pesticides, an
immunotoxicity study is required for metrafenone. EPA has evaluated the
available metrafenone toxicity data to determine whether an additional
UFDB is needed to account for the lack of the study.
Decreased thymus weight, a potential immunotoxic effect, was observed
only in adults and solely in a 2-generation reproduction study in rats.
Because this effect was observed in only one species (rats) in one
study, at the highest dose tested, and the NOAEL for this effect is 3X
higher than the NOAEL for liver toxicity on which the cPAD is based,
EPA believes the NOAEL for liver toxicity is protective of this effect,
and an additional UFDB is not needed to account for
potential immunotoxicity.
ii. There is no indication that metrafenone is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that metrafenone results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were based on assuming
100 PCT and residues 2X higher than the proposed tolerance residue
levels. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground
and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to metrafenone in
drinking water. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure
and risks posed by metrafenone.
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-, intermediate-, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by
comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, and residential exposure
to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
metrafenone is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
metrafenone from food and water will utilize 1% of the cPAD for the
general U.S. population and 5% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old,
the population group receiving the greatest exposure. There are no
residential uses for metrafenone.
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). Because there
is no residential exposure, metrafenone is not expected to pose a
short-term risk.
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). Because there is no residential exposure, metrafenone is not
expected to pose an intermediate-term risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the data
summarized and referenced in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that the
cRfD/cPAD for metrafenone is protective of the cancer effects. As noted
above, the chronic exposure for the general U.S. population utilizes
only 1% of the cPAD.
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 metrafenone residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An adequate gas chromatography (GC) method with electron capture
(ECD) and mass spectrometry (MS) detection, Method FAMS 105-01, is
available to enforce the tolerance expression for grapes. However, EPA
requires radiovalidation data for any future tolerances on other
commodities. Such data were being generated at the time EPA was
reviewing the grape submission.
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.
The Codex has not established a MRL for metrafenone. Although there
has been an agreement to harmonize the proposed grape MRL with Canada,
the MRL has yet to be harmonized between member states.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
EPA is not establishing the proposed tolerances for wine and juice
grapes. Tolerances on raw agricultural commodities (such as grapes) are
applicable to food processed from those commodities (such as grape
juice and wine). Because the processing data indicate that residues of
metrafenone do not concentrate in grape juice or wine, a tolerance on
the raw agricultural commodity is all that is necessary.
EPA is revising the requested tolerance expression to clarify the
chemical moieties that are covered by
[[Page 75393]]
the tolerances and specify how compliance with the tolerances is to be
measured. The revised tolerance expression makes clear that the
tolerances cover residues of the fungicide metrafenone, including its
metabolites and degradates, but that compliance with the specified
tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring only metrafenone (3-
bromo-6-methoxy-2-methylphenyl)(2,3,4-trimethoxy-6-
methylphenyl)methanone in or on the commodities.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of metrafenone,
(3-bromo-6-methoxy-2-methylphenyl)(2,3,4-trimethoxy-6-
methylphenyl)methanone, in or on grape at 4.5 ppm and grape, raisin at
17 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: November 24, 2010.
Steven Bradbury,
Director, 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 180.624 paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 180.624 Metrafenone; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
fungicide metrafenone, including its metabolites and degradates, in or
on the commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance
levels specified in the following table is to be determined by
measuring only metrafenone (3-bromo-6-methoxy-2-methylphenyl)(2,3,4-
trimethoxy-6-methylphenyl)methanone in or on the following commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity Parts per million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grape................................................ 4.5
Grape, raisin........................................ 17
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-30363 Filed 12-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P