Flutolanil; Pesticide Tolerances, 80346-80350 [2010-32147]
Download as PDF
80346
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
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).
V. 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:05 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
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: December 10, 2010.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
■
PART 180—[AMENDED]
‘‘Timothy, forage,’’ and ‘‘Timothy, hay’’
by revising the expiration dates ‘‘12/31/
10’’ to read ‘‘12/31/13.’’
§ 180.582
[Amended]
9. In § 180.582, in the table to
paragraph (b), amend the entry for
‘‘Endive, Belgian’’ by revising the
expiration date ‘‘12/31/10’’ to read
‘‘12/31/13.’’
■
§ 180.589
[Amended]
10. In § 180.589, in the table to
paragraph (b), amend the entry for
‘‘Endive, Belgian’’ by revising the
expiration date ‘‘12/31/10’’ to read
‘‘12/31/13.’’
■
[FR Doc. 2010–32148 Filed 12–21–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
§ 180.430
40 CFR Part 180
[Amended]
2. In § 180.430, in the table to
paragraph (b), amend the entries for
‘‘Grass, forage’’ and ‘‘Grass, hay’’ by
revising the expiration dates ‘‘12/31/10’’
to read ‘‘12/31/13.’’
■
§ 180.434
[Amended]
3. In § 180.434, in the table to
paragraph (b), amend the entries for
‘‘Nectarine’’ and ‘‘Peach’’ by revising the
expiration dates ‘‘12/31/10’’ to read
‘‘12/31/13.’’
■
§ 180.449
[Amended]
4. In § 180.449, in the table to
paragraph (b), amend the entry for
‘‘Bean, lima, seed’’ by revising the
expiration date ‘‘12/31/10’’ to read
‘‘12/31/13.’’
■
§ 180.498
[Amended]
5. In § 180.498, in the table to
paragraph (b), amend the entries for
‘‘Flax, seed’’ and ‘‘Strawberry’’ by
revising the expiration dates ‘‘12/31/10’’
to read ‘‘12/31/13.’’
■
§ 180.517
[Amended]
6. In § 180.517, in the table to
paragraph (b), amend the entries for
‘‘Rutabaga’’ and ‘‘Turnip’’ by revising the
expiration dates ‘‘12/31/10’’ to read
‘‘12/31/13.’’
■
§ 180.566
[Amended]
7. In § 180.566, in the table to
paragraph (b), amend the entry for
‘‘Honey’’ by revising the expiration date
‘‘12/31/10’’ to read ‘‘12/31/13.’’
■
§ 180.572
[Amended]
8. In § 180.572, in the table to
paragraph (b), amend the entries for
■
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Sfmt 4700
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0775; FRL–8855–7]
Flutolanil; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of flutolanil in or
on Brassica leafy vegetable group 5 and
turnip greens. The Interregional
Research Project Number 4 requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 22, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 22, 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–2009–0775. 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–
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22DER1.SGM
22DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
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:
Andrew Ertman, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 308–9367; e-mail address:
ertman.andrew@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.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
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.
You may access Harmonized Guidelines
referenced in this document at https://
www.epa.gov/ocspp/pubs/frs/home/
guideline.htm.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:05 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2009–0775 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 22, 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–2009–0775, 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 January 6,
2010 (75 FR 864) (FRL–8801–5), EPA
issued a notice pursuant to section
408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 9E7612) by the
Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR–
4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201W,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.484 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the fungicide flutolanil,
N-(3-(1-methylethoxy)phenyl)-2(trifluoromethyl)benzamide and its
metabolites converted to
2-(trifluoromethyl) benzoic acid and
calculated as flutolanil, in or on ginseng
at 3.5 parts per million (ppm); vegetable,
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
80347
Brassica, leafy, group 5 at 0.11 ppm; and
turnip, greens at 0.11 ppm. That notice
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Gowan Company, the
registrant, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
IR–4 later withdrew their request to
establish a tolerance on ginseng. Also,
EPA has revised the tolerance levels
proposed by IR–4. The reasons for these
changes are explained in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. * * *’’
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, and the factors specified in
section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for flutolanil
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with flutolanil follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children. The toxicology
studies conducted on flutolanil
demonstrate few or no biologically
significant toxic effects. Liver effects in
E:\FR\FM\22DER1.SGM
22DER1
80348
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
rats included increases in absolute and
relative liver weight in the absence of
clinical chemistry and/or
histopathology findings. In dogs, there
was an elevation in alkaline
phosphatase and cholesterol levels
together with dose-related increases in
absolute and relative liver weights,
slightly enlarged livers, and an increase
in severity of glycogen deposition. The
increased liver weights are considered
to be an adaptive response to flutolanil
treatment and not an adverse effect.
Based on the lack of evidence of
carcinogenicity and the lack of evidence
of mutagenicity, flutolanil is classified
as ‘‘not likely to be carcinogenic to
humans.’’
Flutolanil is not neurotoxic, and it is
not a developmental or reproductive
toxicant. No maternal, reproductive, or
developmental toxicity was observed at
the limit dose. There was no evidence
for increased susceptibility of rat or
rabbit fetuses to in utero exposure or rat
pups to pre- and post-natal exposure to
flutolanil. No toxic effects were
observed in studies in which flutolanil
was administered by the dermal route of
exposure at the limit dose.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by flutolanil as well as
the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0775 in
the document titled ‘‘Flutolanil: Human
Health Risk Assessment for Flutolanil
on Brassica Leafy Vegetables (Crop
Group 5) and Turnip Greens’’ on pages
27–30.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which no adverse effects are
observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:05 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
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 flutolanil used for human
risk assessment is discussed in Unit
III.B., of the final rule published in the
Federal Register of June 11, 2008 (73 FR
33013) (FRL–8365–6).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to flutolanil, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing
flutolanil tolerances in 40 CFR 180.484.
EPA assessed dietary exposures from
flutolanil 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 flutolanil;
therefore, a quantitative acute dietary
exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) 1994–1996 and 1998
Continuing Survey of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels
in food, the chronic dietary analysis
included tolerance level residues, 100%
crop treated estimates and default
processing factors.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that flutolanil does not pose
a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a
dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did
not use anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for flutolanil. Tolerance level residues
and/or 100% CT were assumed for all
food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
for flutolanil in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of flutolanil.
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 Pesticide Root Zone
Model and Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM–EXAMs) and Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI–
GROW) models, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of
flutolanil for chronic exposures are
estimated to be 8.5 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 0.7 ppb for
ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration of value 8.5 ppb
was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets). Flutolanil
is currently registered for the following
uses that could result in residential
exposures: Turf grass and ornamental
plants. Although there is a potential for
residential (non-occupational) exposure,
a quantitative exposure assessment was
not conducted since no toxicological
endpoint attributable to acute, shortterm or intermediate-term exposure
have been identified and the current use
pattern does not indicate chronic or
long-term exposure (6 or more months
of continuous exposure) potential.
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found flutolanil to share
a common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and flutolanil
does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
E:\FR\FM\22DER1.SGM
22DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
assumed that flutolanil does not have a
common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There was no evidence of increased
susceptibility of rat or rabbit fetuses to
in utero exposure or rat pups to prenatal
and postnatal exposure to flutolanil.
Flutolanil is not a developmental or
reproductive toxicant. No maternal,
reproductive, or developmental toxicity
was observed at the limit dose.
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 flutolanil
is complete except for acute and
subchronic neurotoxicity and
immunotoxicity studies. Recent changes
to 40 CFR part 158 make acute and
subchronic neurotoxicity testing
(OPPTS Test Guideline 870.6200), and
immunotoxicity testing (OPPTS Test
Guideline 870.7800) required for
pesticide registration. However, the
available data for flutolanil do not
suggest that the compound produces
hematological or thymus/spleen organ
effects indicative of immunotoxicity.
Further, there is no evidence of
neurotoxicity in any study in the
toxicity database for flutolanil.
Therefore, EPA does not believe that
conducting neurotoxicity and
immunotoxicity studies will result in a
lower POD than currently used for
overall risk assessment. Consequently,
an additional database uncertainty
factor (UF) does not need to be applied.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:05 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
ii. There is no indication that
flutolanil 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
flutolanil exposure 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 performed based on 100% CT and
tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to flutolanil in
drinking water. Residential exposure
does not pose a concern for flutolanil
because (1) chronic residential exposure
is not expected; and (2) although shortterm or intermediate-term residential
exposure may occur, no relevant
adverse effects were identified for
dermal or incidental oral or inhalation
exposure related to residential use.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by flutolanil.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
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, flutolanil 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 flutolanil from
food and water will utilize 1.5% of the
cPAD for children 1 to 2 years 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 flutolanil is not expected.
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
80349
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk.
Short- and intermediate-term aggregate
exposure takes into account short- and
intermediate-term residential exposure
plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Because no short- and/
or intermediate-term adverse effects
were identified, flutolanil is not
expected to pose a short- or
intermediate-term risk.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
flutolanil is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
5. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to flutolanil
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An adequate enforcement
methodology, (Method AU/95R/04), a
common moiety Gas Chromatography/
Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) method
which determines residues of flutolanil
and metabolites as 2-trifluoromethyl
benzoic acid (2–TFBA) is available for
enforcement.
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. No
Canadian, Mexican or Codex MRLs have
been established for Brassica leafy
vegetables and/or turnip greens.
E:\FR\FM\22DER1.SGM
22DER1
80350
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
The proposed tolerance level of 0.11
ppm for both Brassica leafy vegetable
group 5 and turnip greens has been
revised to 0.1 ppm. The level of 0.1 ppm
is based on the sum of the demonstrated
levels of quantitation of flutolanil and
metabolite M4, each 0.05 ppm. The
proposed tolerance of 0.11 ppm is based
on one mustard green trial (of 10 trials)
where flutolanil was quantitated at 0.05
to 0.06 ppm, and M4 was approximately
0.03 ppm. Because total residues were
< 0.1 ppm, EPA is setting the tolerance
level at 0.1 ppm.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of flutolanil, N-(3-(1methylethoxy)phenyl)-2(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including
its metabolites and degradates, in or on
vegetable, brassica, leafy group 5 at 0.1
ppm, and turnip greens at 0.1 ppm.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
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,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:05 Dec 21, 2010
Jkt 223001
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: December 10, 2010.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.484 is amended by
alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table in paragraph
(a) to read as follows:
■
§ 180.484 Flutolanil; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
Turnip, greens ......................
Vegetable, brassica, leafy,
group 5 ..............................
*
*
0.1
0.1
[FR Doc. 2010–32147 Filed 12–21–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
41 CFR Parts 300–3, 301–10, 301–12,
301–30, 301–70, Chapter 301, Parts
302–1, 302–2, 302–3, 302–7, 302–11,
and 303–70
[FTR Amendment 2010–07; FTR Case 2010–
307; Docket 2010–0020, Sequence 1]
RIN 3090–AJ09
Federal Travel Regulation; Removal of
Privately Owned Vehicle Rates;
Privately Owned Automobile Mileage
Reimbursement When Government
Owned Automobiles Are Authorized;
Miscellaneous Amendments;
Correction
Office of Governmentwide
Policy, General Services Administration
(GSA).
ACTION: Final rule; correction.
AGENCY:
GSA is correcting a final rule
that appeared in the Federal Register on
November 29, 2010. The applicability
date for the final rule was incorrectly
designated December 29, 2010. This
final rule correction document corrects
the applicability date to January 1, 2011.
DATES: The effective date for the final
rule published on November 29, 2010 at
75 FR 72965 remains November 29,
2010. The applicability date is corrected
to January 1, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
Regulatory Secretariat (MVCB), 1275
First Street, NE., Washington, DC,
20417, (202) 501–4755, for information
pertaining to status or publication
schedules. For clarification of content,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22DER1.SGM
22DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 245 (Wednesday, December 22, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 80346-80350]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32147]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0775; FRL-8855-7]
Flutolanil; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
flutolanil in or on Brassica leafy vegetable group 5 and turnip greens.
The Interregional Research Project Number 4 requested these tolerances
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective December 22, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 22, 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-2009-0775. 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-
[[Page 80347]]
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: Andrew Ertman, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 308-9367; e-mail address: ertman.andrew@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. You may
access Harmonized Guidelines referenced in this document at https://www.epa.gov/ocspp/pubs/frs/home/guideline.htm.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0775 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 22, 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-2009-0775, 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 January 6, 2010 (75 FR 864) (FRL-8801-
5), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
9E7612) by the Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), 500 College
Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that
40 CFR 180.484 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of
the fungicide flutolanil, N-(3-(1-methylethoxy)phenyl)-2-
(trifluoromethyl)benzamide and its metabolites converted to 2-
(trifluoromethyl) benzoic acid and calculated as flutolanil, in or on
ginseng at 3.5 parts per million (ppm); vegetable, Brassica, leafy,
group 5 at 0.11 ppm; and turnip, greens at 0.11 ppm. That notice
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Gowan Company, the
registrant, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
IR-4 later withdrew their request to establish a tolerance on
ginseng. Also, EPA has revised the tolerance levels proposed by IR-4.
The reasons for these changes are explained in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. * *
*''
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure for flutolanil including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with flutolanil
follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. The toxicology studies conducted on flutolanil demonstrate
few or no biologically significant toxic effects. Liver effects in
[[Page 80348]]
rats included increases in absolute and relative liver weight in the
absence of clinical chemistry and/or histopathology findings. In dogs,
there was an elevation in alkaline phosphatase and cholesterol levels
together with dose-related increases in absolute and relative liver
weights, slightly enlarged livers, and an increase in severity of
glycogen deposition. The increased liver weights are considered to be
an adaptive response to flutolanil treatment and not an adverse effect.
Based on the lack of evidence of carcinogenicity and the lack of
evidence of mutagenicity, flutolanil is classified as ``not likely to
be carcinogenic to humans.''
Flutolanil is not neurotoxic, and it is not a developmental or
reproductive toxicant. No maternal, reproductive, or developmental
toxicity was observed at the limit dose. There was no evidence for
increased susceptibility of rat or rabbit fetuses to in utero exposure
or rat pups to pre- and post-natal exposure to flutolanil. No toxic
effects were observed in studies in which flutolanil was administered
by the dermal route of exposure at the limit dose.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by flutolanil 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 docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0775 in the
document titled ``Flutolanil: Human Health Risk Assessment for
Flutolanil on Brassica Leafy Vegetables (Crop Group 5) and Turnip
Greens'' on pages 27-30.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for flutolanil used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B., of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of June 11, 2008 (73 FR 33013) (FRL-
8365-6).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to flutolanil, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing flutolanil tolerances in 40 CFR
180.484. EPA assessed dietary exposures from flutolanil 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
flutolanil; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment
is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA) 1994-1996 and 1998 Continuing Survey of Food
Intake by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food, the
chronic dietary analysis included tolerance level residues, 100% crop
treated estimates and default processing factors.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that flutolanil does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for flutolanil. Tolerance level residues and/or 100%
CT were assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for flutolanil in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of flutolanil. 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 Pesticide Root Zone Model and Exposure Analysis
Modeling System (PRZM-EXAMs) and Screening Concentration in Ground
Water (SCI-GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) of flutolanil for chronic exposures are estimated to be 8.5
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.7 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 8.5 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Flutolanil is
currently registered for the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Turf grass and ornamental plants. Although there
is a potential for residential (non-occupational) exposure, a
quantitative exposure assessment was not conducted since no
toxicological endpoint attributable to acute, short-term or
intermediate-term exposure have been identified and the current use
pattern does not indicate chronic or long-term exposure (6 or more
months of continuous exposure) potential. Further information regarding
EPA standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures
may be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found flutolanil to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and flutolanil does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
[[Page 80349]]
assumed that flutolanil does not have a common mechanism of toxicity
with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to
determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to
evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There was no evidence of
increased susceptibility of rat or rabbit fetuses to in utero exposure
or rat pups to prenatal and postnatal exposure to flutolanil.
Flutolanil is not a developmental or reproductive toxicant. No
maternal, reproductive, or developmental toxicity was observed at the
limit dose.
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 flutolanil is complete except for
acute and subchronic neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity studies. Recent
changes to 40 CFR part 158 make acute and subchronic neurotoxicity
testing (OPPTS Test Guideline 870.6200), and immunotoxicity testing
(OPPTS Test Guideline 870.7800) required for pesticide registration.
However, the available data for flutolanil do not suggest that the
compound produces hematological or thymus/spleen organ effects
indicative of immunotoxicity. Further, there is no evidence of
neurotoxicity in any study in the toxicity database for flutolanil.
Therefore, EPA does not believe that conducting neurotoxicity and
immunotoxicity studies will result in a lower POD than currently used
for overall risk assessment. Consequently, an additional database
uncertainty factor (UF) does not need to be applied.
ii. There is no indication that flutolanil 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 flutolanil exposure 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 performed based
on 100% CT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to flutolanil in drinking water. Residential
exposure does not pose a concern for flutolanil because (1) chronic
residential exposure is not expected; and (2) although short-term or
intermediate-term residential exposure may occur, no relevant adverse
effects were identified for dermal or incidental oral or inhalation
exposure related to residential use. These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks posed by flutolanil.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, 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,
flutolanil 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
flutolanil from food and water will utilize 1.5% of the cPAD for
children 1 to 2 years 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
flutolanil is not expected.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. Short- and intermediate-term
aggregate exposure takes into account short- and intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background exposure level). Because no short- and/
or intermediate-term adverse effects were identified, flutolanil is not
expected to pose a short- or intermediate-term risk.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, flutolanil is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to flutolanil residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An adequate enforcement methodology, (Method AU/95R/04), a common
moiety Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) method which
determines residues of flutolanil and metabolites as 2-trifluoromethyl
benzoic acid (2-TFBA) is available for enforcement.
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. No Canadian, Mexican or
Codex MRLs have been established for Brassica leafy vegetables and/or
turnip greens.
[[Page 80350]]
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
The proposed tolerance level of 0.11 ppm for both Brassica leafy
vegetable group 5 and turnip greens has been revised to 0.1 ppm. The
level of 0.1 ppm is based on the sum of the demonstrated levels of
quantitation of flutolanil and metabolite M4, each 0.05 ppm. The
proposed tolerance of 0.11 ppm is based on one mustard green trial (of
10 trials) where flutolanil was quantitated at 0.05 to 0.06 ppm, and M4
was approximately 0.03 ppm. Because total residues were < 0.1 ppm, EPA
is setting the tolerance level at 0.1 ppm.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of flutolanil,
N-(3-(1-methylethoxy)phenyl)-2-(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including
its metabolites and degradates, in or on vegetable, brassica, leafy
group 5 at 0.1 ppm, and turnip greens at 0.1 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: December 10, 2010.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
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 180.484 is amended by alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.484 Flutolanil; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Turnip, greens.......................................... 0.1
Vegetable, brassica, leafy, group 5..................... 0.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2010-32147 Filed 12-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P