Imazosulfuron; Pesticide Tolerances, 81878-81885 [2010-32451]
Download as PDF
81878
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
G. Executive Order 13175—Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000). In this action, EPA is not
addressing any tribal implementation
plans. This action is limited to states
that do not meet their existing
obligation for PSD SIP submittal. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply
to this action.
Although Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this final rule, EPA
specifically solicited additional
comment on the proposal for this action
from tribal officials and we received one
comment from a tribal agency.
Additionally, EPA participated in a
conference call on July 29, 2010, with
the National Tribal Air Association
(NTAA).
H. Executive Order 13045—Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets E.O. 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only
to those regulatory actions that concern
health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5–501 of
the E.O. has the potential to influence
the regulation. This action is not subject
to E.O. 13045 because it merely
prescribes EPA’s action for states that do
not meet their existing obligation for
PSD SIP submittal.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
I. Executive Order 13211—Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ‘‘significant energy
action’’ as defined in Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)),
because it is not a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866.
This action merely prescribes EPA’s
action for states that do not meet their
existing obligation for PSD SIP
submittal.
J. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law
104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:32 Dec 28, 2010
Jkt 223001
bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations
when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards. Therefore, EPA is
not considering the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
K. Executive Order 12898—Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) establishes federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the U.S.
EPA has determined that this final
rule will not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or
low-income populations because it does
not affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the
environment. This rule merely
prescribes EPA’s action for states that do
not meet their existing obligation for
PSD SIP submittal.
L. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. Section 804
exempts from section 801 the following
types of rules: (1) Rules of particular
applicability; (2) rules relating to agency
management or personnel; and (3) rules
of agency organization, procedure, or
practice that do not substantially affect
the rights or obligations of non-agency
parties. 5 U.S. 804(3). EPA is not
required to submit a rule report
regarding this action under section 801
because this is a rule of agency
organization, procedure, or practice that
does not substantially affect the rights or
obligations of non-agency parties.
V. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act,
judicial review of this final action is
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
available by filing of a petition for
review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit by
February 28, 2011. Any such judicial
review is limited to only those
objections that are raised with
reasonable specificity in timely
comments. Under section 307(b)(2) of
the Act, the requirements of this final
action may not be challenged later in
civil or criminal proceedings brought by
us to enforce these requirements.
VI. Statutory Authority
The statutory authority for this action
is provided by sections 101, 111, 114,
116, and 301 of the CAA as amended
(42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7414, 7416, and
7601).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Air pollution control, Carbon dioxide,
Carbon dioxide equivalents, Carbon
monoxide, Environmental protection,
Greenhouse gases, Hydrofluorocarbons,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Methane, Nitrogen dioxide, Nitrous
oxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Perfluorocarbons, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
hexafluoride, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: December 23, 2010.
Gina McCarthy,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and
Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2010–32762 Filed 12–28–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0205; FRL–8857–4]
Imazosulfuron; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of imazosulfuron
in or on pepper, bell; pepper, non-bell;
rice, grain; and tomato. Valent USA
Corporation requested these tolerances
under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 29, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 28, 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).
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\29DER1.SGM
29DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2009–0205. 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:
Susan Stanton, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–5218; e-mail address:
stanton.susan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:32 Dec 28, 2010
Jkt 223001
81879
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
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.’’
In the Federal Register of May 6, 2009
(74 FR 20947) (FRL–8412–7), 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 9F7535) by Valent
USA Corporation, 1600 Riviera Ave.,
Suite 200, Walnut Creek, CA 94596. The
petition requested that 40 CFR part 180
be amended by adding a section for the
herbicide imazosulfuron and
establishing tolerances therein for
residues of imazosulfuron, 2-chloro-N[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl] imidazo[1,2-a]pyridine-3-sulfonamide, in or on
pepper, bell, fruit; pepper, non-bell,
fruit; rice, grain; and tomato, fruit; each
at 0.02 parts per million (ppm). That
notice referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Valent USA
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.
EPA has modified the proposed
commodity terms for pepper and tomato
commodities and revised the requested
tolerance expression in accordance with
current policy. The reasons for these
changes are explained in Unit IV.C.
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–2009–0205 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 28, 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–2009–0205, by one of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\29DER1.SGM
29DER1
81880
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for imazosulfuron
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with imazosulfuron 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 data for imazosulfuron
suggest that this herbicide possesses
relatively low toxicity. Many of the
effects of single or repeated dosing were
observed near or beyond the respective
limit doses.
Imazosulfuron is of low acute toxicity
by the oral, dermal, and inhalation
routes of exposure; it is not a skin or eye
irritant or a dermal sensitizer. The
primary target organ of imazosulfuron in
repeated-dose studies was the liver in
all species tested. Mild to moderate
thyroid effects were apparent only in
the chronic toxicity study in dogs.
Dramatic eye effects (retinal
degeneration, lens vascularization,
cataracts and corneal scarring) were
observed in rats fed > 1,000 mg/kg/day
beginning at 3 months in the chronic
toxicity/carcinogenicity study. Ocular
effects (increased incidence of eye
opacity, corneal edema, inflammation
and neovascularization) were also
observed in the high-dose males (4,577
mg/kg/day) in the 90-day feeding
toxicity study in rats. Decreased body
weight and body weight gain compared
to control were frequent findings
throughout the toxicology database for
imazosulfuron.
Clinical signs (decreased motor
activity, abnormal gait, upward
curvature of the spine and piloerection)
were observed in males at the limit dose
of the acute neurotoxicity study;
however, these effects can be attributed
to generalized toxicity and were
resolved by Day 2 of the study. No
neurotoxic effects were observed during
the subchronic screening battery or
noted as clinical signs in any other
repeated-dose study.
No developmental effects were
observed at the highest dose tested
(HDT) (125 mg/kg/day) in the rabbit
developmental toxicity study. No
developmental or reproductive toxicity
was observed in the 1-generation rat
study. Decreased pup viability was
observed in the rat 2-generation
reproduction study at a dose
approaching the limit dose (LOAEL =
892 mg/kg/day) in both the F1 and F2
offspring generations. Mortality was also
observed in the parental generation at
this dose. No increased qualitative or
quantitative offspring susceptibility was
apparent in any of the submitted studies
for imazosulfuron.
There was no evidence of
carcinogenicity in rats and mice up to
the limit dose at 24 and 18 months,
respectively. Imazosulfuron was
determined to be non-mutagenic in
bacteria and negative in an in vivo
mammalian cytogenetics assay. Overall,
there was no evidence that
imazosulfuron was either mutagenic or
clastogenic in either in vivo or in vitro
assays. The cancer classification is ‘‘not
likely to be carcinogenic to humans,’’
based on the absence of significant
tumor increases in the carcinogenicity
studies.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by imazosulfuron as well
as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-
adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in the document
‘‘Imazosulfuron: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Uses on Rice,
Peppers and Tomatoes,’’ p. 45 in docket
ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0205.
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
imazosulfuron used for human risk
assessment is shown in the Table of this
unit.
TABLE—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR IMAZOSULFURON FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety factors
Exposure/Scenario
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Acute dietary (Females 13–49 years of
age).
Acute dietary (General population including
females 13–49 years of age and infants
and children).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:32 Dec 28, 2010
Jkt 223001
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
An acute reference dose specific to females age 13–49 was not identified, because there was no
prenatal or fetal toxicity observed in developmental or reproductive animal studies following a single oral dose.
NOAEL = 400 mg/kg/day UFA = Acute RfD = 4 mg/
Acute neurotoxicity screening battery.
10x.
kg/day.
LOAEL = 2,000 mg/kg/day based on the
following clinical signs: Abnormal gait,
decreased activity, piloerection and upward curvature of the spine; and incidents of irregular breathing, reduced
righting reflex, tremors, decreased visual placement response in males and
increased response to sound in one
female.
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\29DER1.SGM
29DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
81881
TABLE—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR IMAZOSULFURON FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT—Continued
Exposure/Scenario
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Chronic dietary (All populations) ................
UFH = 10x ...................................
FQPA SF = 1x ............................
NOAEL= 75 mg/kg/day UFA =
10x.
aPAD = 4 mg/kg/
day
Chronic RfD = 0.75
mg/kg/day.
UFH = 10x ...................................
FQPA SF = 1x ............................
NOAEL= 235 mg/kg/day UFA =
10x.
cPAD = 0.75 mg/kg/
day.
LOC for MOE = 100
Incidental oral short-term (1 to 30 days)
and intermediate-term (1 to 6 months).
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days) and intermediate-term (1 to 6 months).
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 days) and intermediate-term (1 to 6 months).
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) ...............
Study and toxicological effects
Chronic toxicity in the dog.
LOAEL = 150 mg/kg/day based on moderate thyroid hypertrophy (males at
mid- and high-dose; mild hypertrophy
in females at high-dose).
Reproduction, 2-generation (rat).
LOAEL = 892 mg/kg/day based on mortality, clinical signs, decreased body
weights, body weight gains and food
consumption in parents.
90-day oral toxicity (rat).
LOAEL = 956 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight gains and food
efficiency.
UFH = 10x.
FQPA SF = 1x.
No systemic toxicity occurred at the limit dose and the primary toxic effects of concern (liver, eye)
were adequately assessed in a 21-day dermal toxicity study. It is concluded that this compound
is not or is poorly absorbed through the skin and, therefore, a quantitative risk assessment for
this route and duration of exposure is not necessary.
Inhalation (or oral) study NOAEL LOC for MOE = 100 Reproduction, 2-generation (rat).
= 235 mg/kg/day (inhalation
LOAEL = 892 mg/kg/day based on morabsorption rate = 100%).
tality, clinical signs, decreased body
weights, body weight gains and food
consumption in parents.
UFA = 10x.
UFH = 10x.
FQPA SF = 1x ............................ ................................. 90-day oral toxicity (rat). LOAEL = 956
mg/kg/day based on decreased body
weight gains and food efficiency.
Classification: ‘‘Not likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’ based on the absence of significant tumor
increases in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies.
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. PAD = population adjusted dose (a =
acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to imazosulfuron, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances. There are no
tolerances currently established for
imazosulfuron. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from imazosulfuron 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. Such effects were identified
for imazosulfuron. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food
consumption information from the
United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) 1994–1996 and 1998
Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food
Intakes by Individuals (CSFII). As to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:32 Dec 28, 2010
Jkt 223001
residue levels in food, EPA assumed
that residues are present in all
commodities at the tolerance level and
that 100% of commodities are treated
with imazosulfuron. DEEMTM 7.81
default concentration factors were used
to estimate residues of imazosulfuron in
processed commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998
CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA
assumed that residues are present in all
commodities at the tolerance level and
that 100% of commodities are treated
with imazosulfuron. DEEMTM 7.81
default concentration factors were used
to estimate residues of imazosulfuron in
processed commodities.
iii. Cancer. Based on the results of
carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice,
EPA classified imazosulfuron as ‘‘Not
likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’;
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for imazosulfuron. Tolerance level
residues and 100 PCT were assumed for
all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The residues of concern in
drinking water include imazosulfuron
and its degradates HMS, IPSN, UDPM,
ADPM, and SDPM. The Agency used
screening level water exposure models
in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for imazosulfuron and its
degradates in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of
imazosulfuron and its degradates.
Further information regarding EPA
E:\FR\FM\29DER1.SGM
29DER1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
81882
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
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), Tier 1 Rice
Model, and Screening Concentration in
Ground Water (SCI–GROW) models, the
estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) of imazosulfuron and its
degradates for both acute exposures and
chronic exposures for non-cancer
assessments are estimated to be 278.9
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water
(based on the Tier 1 Rice Model results)
and 4.8 ppb for ground water (based on
the SCI–GROW model results).
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
acute and chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration
value of 278.9 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).
Imazosulfuron is currently registered for
the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Residential
turfgrass and recreational areas. EPA
assessed residential exposure using the
following assumptions: There is a
potential for exposure of homeowners
applying products containing
imazosulfuron on home lawns. There is
also a potential for post-application
exposure of adults and children entering
turf areas that have been treated with
imazosulfuron and for bystander
exposure of adults and children in areas
adjacent to pesticide applications.
Residential handlers may receive
short-term dermal and inhalation
exposure to imazosulfuron when
mixing, loading and applying the
pesticide on home lawns. Since a
dermal endpoint of concern was not
identified for imazosulfuron, only shortterm inhalation exposure of residential
handlers was assessed.
Adults and children may receive
short-term inhalation and dermal
exposures from entering turf areas
treated with imazosulfuron.
Volatilization of imazosulfuron may
also be a source of short-term postapplication inhalation exposure of
bystanders nearby application sites.
Finally, children may receive short-term
incidental oral exposure (i.e., hand-tomouth, object-to-mouth and soil
ingestion exposure) during postapplication activities on treated turf.
EPA did not identify any dermal
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:32 Dec 28, 2010
Jkt 223001
endpoints of concern for imazosulfuron;
and a quantitative post-application
inhalation exposure assessment was not
performed for imazosulfuron due to its
low acute inhalation toxicity, low vapor
pressure (< 3.5 × 10¥6 Pa), low proposed
use rate (0.3 lb ai/A), and the soildirected application method (i.e., it is
not applied using equipment, such as
air blast sprayers, that would result in
higher post-application inhalation
exposures). Therefore, EPA assessed
only short-term post-application
incidental oral exposure of children
(toddlers).
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 imazosulfuron to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
imazosulfuron does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that imazosulfuron does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity
with other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
The pre- and postnatal toxicity database
for imazosulfuron includes guideline rat
and rabbit developmental toxicity
studies and a 2-generation reproduction
toxicity study in rats. No developmental
effects were observed at the HDT in the
rabbit developmental toxicity study, and
no developmental or reproductive
toxicity was observed in the
developmental (1-generation) rat study.
In the 2-generation rat reproduction
study, both decreased pup viability and
parental mortality were observed, but
only at a dose approaching 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
imazosulfuron is largely complete,
lacking only an immunotoxicity study.
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity
data for imazosulfuron and determined
that an additional database uncertainty
factor is not needed to account for
potential immunotoxicity. The most
sensitive endpoint in the database is
moderate thyroid hypertrophy. Liver
toxicity accompanied by body weight
and food consumption effects is seen
throughout the toxicology database. No
treatment-related changes indicative of
potential immunotoxicity were seen in
hematology parameters, organ weights
(thymus, spleen), gross necropsy
(enlarged lymph nodes) or
histopathology (spleen, thymus, lymph
nodes) when tested up to the limit dose
in mice and rats. Therefore, EPA does
not believe that conducting a special
series 870.7800 immunotoxicity study
will result in a NOAEL less than 75 mg/
kg/day, which is presently used as the
point of departure for chronic risk
assessment.
ii. No neurotoxic effects were
observed during the subchronic
screening battery or noted as clinical
signs in any other repeated-dose study.
Although untoward clinical signs were
observed in the acute neurotoxicity
study, these effects can be attributed to
generalized toxicity and were resolved
by Day 2 of the study. Based on these
considerations, there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
imazosulfuron 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.
E:\FR\FM\29DER1.SGM
29DER1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
iv. There are no significant residual
uncertainties in the exposure databases.
Data have been requested to confirm the
stability of imazosulfuron during frozen
storage and the metabolic profile of
pyrimidine-labeled imazosulfuron in
rice grain in the confined rotational crop
trial. A field rotational crop study is also
required for grain (wheat); however, as
explained in Unit III.D.3.iv.c., EPA does
not expect these studies to have a
measurable impact on exposure
estimates for imazosulfuron.
a. Storage stability. The final reports
of the storage stability studies must be
submitted, reflecting frozen storage
intervals of up to 11.8 months for
peppers, up to 34.5 months for rice
grain, and up to 17.3 months for
tomatoes. Interim data suggest that
imazosulfuron is stable in frozen
storage, and similar sulfonylurea
chemicals are known to be stable.
Therefore, EPA expects imazosulfuron
to be stable in frozen storage but is
requiring the final study reports as
confirmation.
b. Metabolic profile. The HPLC profile
for the pyrimidinyl (Py)-label grain
storage stability analysis must be
submitted to confirm that the metabolite
profile was stable in Py-label grain.
Grain samples from the confined
rotational crop study were stored for a
relatively long interval (9 months) prior
to completion of the analyses. Analysis
of an imidozolyl (Im)-label sample after
the 9-month period yielded a metabolic
profile similar to that of a sample
analyzed at the start of the period. A
similar comparison must be made for
the Py-label sample of grain. This is of
no practical consequence for risk
assessment because total residue levels
on grain were small (<0.01 ppm at a
365-day plantback interval),
imazosulfuron was not present, and no
metabolites/degradates were considered
toxicologically significant.
c. Field accumulation in rotational
crops (grain). The grain (wheat)
rotational crop study is needed to
identify maximum levels of residues in
grain and livestock feed items (forage,
straw) as a function of the plantback
interval. On an interim basis, a
plantback interval of 12 months is being
required for grains and soybeans. The
results of the rotational crop study may
allow a shorter plantback interval. The
confined rotational crop study showed
that imazosulfuron and metabolites will
be negligible (<0.01 ppm) on forage,
hay, straw, stover, and grain at a 365day plantback interval and will,
therefore, make no contribution to
dietary exposure.
The dietary food exposure
assessments were performed assuming
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:32 Dec 28, 2010
Jkt 223001
tolerance-level residues and 100 PCT for
all commodities. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to
imazosulfuron in drinking water. EPA
used similarly conservative assumptions
to assess postapplication exposure of
children as well as incidental oral
exposure of toddlers. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by imazosulfuron.
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. Using the exposure assumptions
discussed in this unit for acute
exposure, the acute dietary exposure
from food and water to imazosulfuron
will occupy 1.4% of the aPAD for
infants less than 1 year old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to imazosulfuron
from food and water will utilize 2.7% of
the cPAD for infants less than 1 year
old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the
explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic
residential exposure to residues of
imazosulfuron is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Imazosulfuron is
currently registered for uses that could
result in short-term residential
exposure, and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with short-term residential
exposures to imazosulfuron.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
81883
combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures result in aggregate
MOEs of 40,000 for adults and 7,000 for
children. For adults, the aggregate MOE
includes short-term residential handler
inhalation exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure to imazosulfuron from
food and water. For children, the
aggregate MOE includes short-term
incidental oral residential exposure plus
chronic dietary exposure to
imazosulfuron from food and water.
Because EPA’s level of concern for
imazosulfuron is a MOE of 100 or
below, these MOEs are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level). An
intermediate-term adverse effect was
identified; however, imazosulfuron is
not registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on intermediateterm residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure
and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for
imazosulfuron.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
imazosulfuron is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children,
from aggregate exposure to
imazosulfuron residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(liquid chromatography/mass
spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC/
MS/MS) Method RM–42C–3) is
available to enforce the tolerance
expression. 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.
E:\FR\FM\29DER1.SGM
29DER1
81884
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
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 imazosulfuron.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
EPA is revising the proposed
commodity terms for ‘‘pepper, bell,
fruit’’; ‘‘pepper, non-bell, fruit’’; and
‘‘tomato, fruit’’; to read ‘‘pepper, bell’’;
‘‘pepper, non-bell’’; and ‘‘tomato’’. The
commodity terms have been changed in
accordance with the guidance in the
Agency’s Food and Feed Commodity
Vocabulary.
EPA is also revising the requested
tolerance expression to clarify the
chemical moieties that are covered by
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
herbicide imazosulfuron, including its
metabolites and degradates, but that
compliance with the tolerance levels is
to be determined by measuring only
imazosulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4,6dimethoxy-2pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]imidazo[1,2-a]pyridine-3-sulfonamide, in or on
the commodities.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of imazosulfuron, including
its metabolites and degradates, in or on
pepper, bell at 0.02 ppm; pepper, nonbell at 0.02 ppm; rice, grain at 0.02 ppm;
and tomato at 0.02 ppm. Compliance
with the tolerance levels is to be
determined by measuring only
imazosulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4,6dimethoxy-2pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]imidazo[1,2-a]pyridine-3-sulfonamide, in or on
the commodities.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:32 Dec 28, 2010
Jkt 223001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 13, 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.
2. Section 180.651 is added to read as
follows:
■
§ 180.651 Imazosulfuron; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of the herbicide
imazosulfuron, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on the following
commodities. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified in the
following table below is to be
determined by measuring only
imazosulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4,6dimethoxy-2pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]imidazo[1,2-a]pyridine-3-sulfonamide, in or on
the commodity.
E:\FR\FM\29DER1.SGM
29DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Parts per
million
Commodity
Pepper, bell ..............................
Pepper, non-bell .......................
Rice, grain ................................
Tomato ......................................
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues.
[Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2010–32451 Filed 12–28–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
42 CFR Parts 412, 413, 422, and 495
[CMS–0033–F2]
RIN 0938–AP78
Medicare and Medicaid Programs;
Electronic Health Record Incentive
Program; Correcting Amendment
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
AGENCY:
Final rule; correcting
amendment.
ACTION:
This document corrects
typographical and technical errors
identified in the final rule entitled
‘‘Medicare and Medicaid Programs;
Electronic Health Record Incentive
Program’’ that appeared in the July 28,
2010 Federal Register.
SUMMARY:
Effective Date: This correcting
amendment is effective December 29,
2010.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rachel Maisler, (410) 786–5754.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
I. Background
In FR Doc. 2010–17207 (75 FR 44314)
the final rule entitled ‘‘Medicare and
Medicaid Programs; Electronic Health
Record Incentive Program’’ (hereinafter
referred to as the Medicare and
Medicaid EHR Incentive Program), there
were several technical and
typographical errors that are identified
in the Summary of Errors section and
corrected in the Correction of Errors
section and in the regulations text of
this correcting amendment.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:32 Dec 28, 2010
Jkt 223001
II. Summary of Errors
A. Errors in the Preamble
In the preamble to this final rule, we
made the following technical and
typographical errors.
On page 44314, in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT, we are correcting
the contact information for Medicaid
incentive payment issues for better
accuracy.
On page 44337, in our response to a
comment on the objective generate and
transmit permissible prescriptions
electronically, we inadvertently
referenced only the restrictions
established by the Department of Justice
(DOJ) on electronic prescribing for
controlled substances in Schedule II,
when in fact we meant to include
Schedule II–V. We intended to
encompass all prescriptions where eprescribing is not permitted, so we are
including Schedules III–V. At the time
of the publication of the our January 13,
2010 proposed rule, the Drug
Enforcement Agency (DEA) had not
published its March 31, 2010 final rule
(75 FR 16236) on the electronic
prescribing of controlled substances. We
are aligning our regulation with the DEA
regulations regarding electronic
prescribing of controlled substances by
adding schedules II–V so that we are in
line with DEA regulation.
On page 44351, in our discussion of
the proposed rule EP/Eligible Hospital
Measure, we erroneously referred to
‘‘five rules’’ related to clinical decision
support although we reduced that
requirement to one rule.
On page 44359, in our response to a
comment regarding charging fees, we
inadvertently omitted a word. Also, in
our discussion of the numerator and
denominator for the clinical summary
objective, we inadvertently referred to
unique patients, rather than to office
visits. As the measure for this objective
relies on office visits (see
§ 495.6(d)(13)), we are correcting the
preamble to also refer to office visits.
We have also eliminated a reference in
the preamble to eligible hospitals and
CAHs in the threshold for this objective,
as the objective applies only to EPs.
On pages 44440 and 44442, we are
revising our discussions of hospitalbased EPs, so that they correctly refer to
EPs that furnish ‘‘90 percent or more,’’
(rather than ‘‘more than 90 percent’’) of
their covered professional services in an
inpatient or emergency department
setting. This is in keeping with the
definition in § 495.4.
On page 44487, we are correcting the
preamble to more precisely state that the
90-day period for deriving hospitals’
patient volume is based on the
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
81885
preceding fiscal year. This is in keeping
with § 495.306, which specifically
references the fiscal year.
Also, on page 44487 and page 44488
we inadvertently referred to hospitals
when discussing the patient panel
methodology for estimating Medicaid
patient volume. As the patient panel
methodology will be used only by EPs
(and as our regulation cites only to EPs
when discussing the patient panel
methodology—see § 495.306(d)), we are
eliminating the references to hospitals.
On page 44488, we incorrectly
included ‘‘unduplicated Medicaid
encounters’’ in the last sentence, instead
of ‘‘unduplicated encounters.’’ This
correction allows for us to keep the
numerator and denominator consistent
when determining the Medicaid patient
volume.
On pages 44499, 44518, 44549, and
44562, we made typographical errors
which include errors in mathematical
symbols, column headings, and the
numbering and referencing of tables.
B. Errors in the Regulation Text
On page 44568, in § 495.6(d)(14)(i),
we erroneously omitted medication
allergies in the list of examples.
Therefore, we are including this
reference to be consistent with the
preamble of the July 28, 2010 final rule.
On page 44568, in § 495.6(e)(1), we
inadvertently omitted a reference to the
exclusion for any EP who writes fewer
than 100 prescriptions during the EHR
reporting period (as discussed in the
preamble of the final rule (see page
44336)). Therefore, we are correcting
§ 495.6(e)(1) by referencing this
exclusion in accordance with
§ 495.6(a)(2) ‘‘Implement drug-formulary
checks.’’
On page 44587, in § 495.366(b)(3), we
made inadvertent errors by citing to
inpatient and outpatient settings, rather
than the inpatient or emergency room
settings in a discussion of ‘‘hospitalbased.’’
On page 44588, in § 495.368(c)
regarding overpayments, we are
correcting the period of consideration
for overpayments. We note that section
1903(d)(2) of the Act was amended by
section 6506 of the Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act (known as the
Affordable Care Act (ACA)). This
amendment changed the mandatory
time period for collection of
overpayments from 60 days to 1 year.
Therefore, we are correcting § 495.368(c)
to implement this statutory change.
III. Correction of Errors in the Preamble
In FR Doc. 2010–17207 of July 28,
2010, we make the following
corrections:
E:\FR\FM\29DER1.SGM
29DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 29, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81878-81885]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32451]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0205; FRL-8857-4]
Imazosulfuron; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
imazosulfuron in or on pepper, bell; pepper, non-bell; rice, grain; and
tomato. Valent USA Corporation requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective December 29, 2010. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 28, 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).
[[Page 81879]]
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0205. 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: Susan Stanton, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-5218; e-mail address: stanton.susan@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-2009-0205 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 28, 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-2009-0205, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online 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 May 6, 2009 (74 FR 20947) (FRL-8412-7),
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 9F7535)
by Valent USA Corporation, 1600 Riviera Ave., Suite 200, Walnut Creek,
CA 94596. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by
adding a section for the herbicide imazosulfuron and establishing
tolerances therein for residues of imazosulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4,6-
dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl] imidazo-[1,2-a]pyridine-3-
sulfonamide, in or on pepper, bell, fruit; pepper, non-bell, fruit;
rice, grain; and tomato, fruit; each at 0.02 parts per million (ppm).
That notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Valent USA
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.
EPA has modified the proposed commodity terms for pepper and tomato
commodities and revised the requested tolerance expression in
accordance with current policy. 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
[[Page 81880]]
sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for imazosulfuron including exposure resulting from
the tolerances established by this action. EPA's assessment of
exposures and risks associated with imazosulfuron 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 data for imazosulfuron suggest that this herbicide
possesses relatively low toxicity. Many of the effects of single or
repeated dosing were observed near or beyond the respective limit
doses.
Imazosulfuron is of low acute toxicity by the oral, dermal, and
inhalation routes of exposure; it is not a skin or eye irritant or a
dermal sensitizer. The primary target organ of imazosulfuron in
repeated-dose studies was the liver in all species tested. Mild to
moderate thyroid effects were apparent only in the chronic toxicity
study in dogs. Dramatic eye effects (retinal degeneration, lens
vascularization, cataracts and corneal scarring) were observed in rats
fed > 1,000 mg/kg/day beginning at 3 months in the chronic toxicity/
carcinogenicity study. Ocular effects (increased incidence of eye
opacity, corneal edema, inflammation and neovascularization) were also
observed in the high-dose males (4,577 mg/kg/day) in the 90-day feeding
toxicity study in rats. Decreased body weight and body weight gain
compared to control were frequent findings throughout the toxicology
database for imazosulfuron.
Clinical signs (decreased motor activity, abnormal gait, upward
curvature of the spine and piloerection) were observed in males at the
limit dose of the acute neurotoxicity study; however, these effects can
be attributed to generalized toxicity and were resolved by Day 2 of the
study. No neurotoxic effects were observed during the subchronic
screening battery or noted as clinical signs in any other repeated-dose
study.
No developmental effects were observed at the highest dose tested
(HDT) (125 mg/kg/day) in the rabbit developmental toxicity study. No
developmental or reproductive toxicity was observed in the 1-generation
rat study. Decreased pup viability was observed in the rat 2-generation
reproduction study at a dose approaching the limit dose (LOAEL = 892
mg/kg/day) in both the F1 and F2 offspring generations. Mortality was
also observed in the parental generation at this dose. No increased
qualitative or quantitative offspring susceptibility was apparent in
any of the submitted studies for imazosulfuron.
There was no evidence of carcinogenicity in rats and mice up to the
limit dose at 24 and 18 months, respectively. Imazosulfuron was
determined to be non-mutagenic in bacteria and negative in an in vivo
mammalian cytogenetics assay. Overall, there was no evidence that
imazosulfuron was either mutagenic or clastogenic in either in vivo or
in vitro assays. The cancer classification is ``not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans,'' based on the absence of significant tumor
increases in the carcinogenicity studies.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by imazosulfuron as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in the document ``Imazosulfuron: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Uses on Rice, Peppers and Tomatoes,'' p. 45 in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0205.
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 imazosulfuron used for human risk assessment is shown in
the Table of this unit.
Table--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Imazosulfuron 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 (Females 13-49 years An acute reference dose specific to females age 13-49 was not identified,
of age). because there was no prenatal or fetal toxicity observed in developmental
or reproductive animal studies following a single oral dose.
Acute dietary (General population NOAEL = 400 mg/kg/day Acute RfD = 4 mg/kg/ Acute neurotoxicity
including females 13-49 years of UFA = 10x. day. screening battery.
age and infants and children). LOAEL = 2,000 mg/kg/day
based on the following
clinical signs: Abnormal
gait, decreased activity,
piloerection and upward
curvature of the spine;
and incidents of
irregular breathing,
reduced righting reflex,
tremors, decreased visual
placement response in
males and increased
response to sound in one
female.
[[Page 81881]]
UFH = 10x.............. aPAD = 4 mg/kg/day
FQPA SF = 1x...........
Chronic dietary (All populations).. NOAEL= 75 mg/kg/day UFA Chronic RfD = 0.75 mg/ Chronic toxicity in the
= 10x. kg/day. dog.
LOAEL = 150 mg/kg/day
based on moderate thyroid
hypertrophy (males at mid-
and high-dose; mild
hypertrophy in females at
high-dose).
UFH = 10x.............. cPAD = 0.75 mg/kg/day.
FQPA SF = 1x...........
Incidental oral short-term (1 to 30 NOAEL= 235 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 100..... Reproduction, 2-generation
days) and intermediate-term (1 to UFA = 10x. (rat).
6 months). LOAEL = 892 mg/kg/day
based on mortality,
clinical signs, decreased
body weights, body weight
gains and food
consumption in parents.
90-day oral toxicity
(rat).
LOAEL = 956 mg/kg/day
based on decreased body
weight gains and food
efficiency.
UFH = 10x..............
FQPA SF = 1x...........
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days) No systemic toxicity occurred at the limit dose and the primary toxic
and intermediate-term (1 to 6 effects of concern (liver, eye) were adequately assessed in a 21-day
months). dermal toxicity study. It is concluded that this compound is not or is
poorly absorbed through the skin and, therefore, a quantitative risk
assessment for this route and duration of exposure is not necessary.
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 Inhalation (or oral) LOC for MOE = 100..... Reproduction, 2-generation
days) and intermediate-term (1 to study NOAEL = 235 mg/ (rat).
6 months). kg/day (inhalation LOAEL = 892 mg/kg/day
absorption rate = based on mortality,
100%). clinical signs, decreased
body weights, body weight
gains and food
consumption in parents.
UFA = 10x..............
UFH = 10x..............
FQPA SF = 1x........... ...................... 90-day oral toxicity
(rat). LOAEL = 956 mg/kg/
day based on decreased
body weight gains and
food efficiency.
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).. Classification: ``Not likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans'' based on the
absence of significant tumor increases in two adequate rodent
carcinogenicity studies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD =
reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to imazosulfuron, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances. There are no tolerances currently
established for imazosulfuron. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
imazosulfuron 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. Such effects were identified
for imazosulfuron. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food
consumption information from the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) 1994-1996 and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of
Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food, EPA
assumed that residues are present in all commodities at the tolerance
level and that 100% of commodities are treated with imazosulfuron.
DEEMTM 7.81 default concentration factors were used to
estimate residues of imazosulfuron in processed commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed that residues
are present in all commodities at the tolerance level and that 100% of
commodities are treated with imazosulfuron. DEEMTM 7.81
default concentration factors were used to estimate residues of
imazosulfuron in processed commodities.
iii. Cancer. Based on the results of carcinogenicity studies in
rats and mice, EPA classified imazosulfuron as ``Not likely to be
Carcinogenic 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 or PCT information in the dietary
assessment for imazosulfuron. Tolerance level residues and 100 PCT were
assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The residues of concern in
drinking water include imazosulfuron and its degradates HMS, IPSN,
UDPM, ADPM, and SDPM. The Agency used screening level water exposure
models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for
imazosulfuron and its degradates in drinking water. These simulation
models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of imazosulfuron and its degradates. Further
information regarding EPA
[[Page 81882]]
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), Tier 1
Rice Model, and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW)
models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
imazosulfuron and its degradates for both acute exposures and chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 278.9 parts
per billion (ppb) for surface water (based on the Tier 1 Rice Model
results) and 4.8 ppb for ground water (based on the SCI-GROW model
results).
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute and chronic dietary
risk assessment, the water concentration value of 278.9 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). Imazosulfuron is
currently registered for the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Residential turfgrass and recreational areas.
EPA assessed residential exposure using the following assumptions:
There is a potential for exposure of homeowners applying products
containing imazosulfuron on home lawns. There is also a potential for
post-application exposure of adults and children entering turf areas
that have been treated with imazosulfuron and for bystander exposure of
adults and children in areas adjacent to pesticide applications.
Residential handlers may receive short-term dermal and inhalation
exposure to imazosulfuron when mixing, loading and applying the
pesticide on home lawns. Since a dermal endpoint of concern was not
identified for imazosulfuron, only short-term inhalation exposure of
residential handlers was assessed.
Adults and children may receive short-term inhalation and dermal
exposures from entering turf areas treated with imazosulfuron.
Volatilization of imazosulfuron may also be a source of short-term
post-application inhalation exposure of bystanders nearby application
sites. Finally, children may receive short-term incidental oral
exposure (i.e., hand-to-mouth, object-to-mouth and soil ingestion
exposure) during post-application activities on treated turf. EPA did
not identify any dermal endpoints of concern for imazosulfuron; and a
quantitative post-application inhalation exposure assessment was not
performed for imazosulfuron due to its low acute inhalation toxicity,
low vapor pressure (< 3.5 x 10-6 Pa), low proposed use rate
(0.3 lb ai/A), and the soil-directed application method (i.e., it is
not applied using equipment, such as air blast sprayers, that would
result in higher post-application inhalation exposures). Therefore, EPA
assessed only short-term post-application incidental oral exposure of
children (toddlers).
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 imazosulfuron to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and imazosulfuron does not appear
to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
imazosulfuron does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The pre- and postnatal
toxicity database for imazosulfuron includes guideline rat and rabbit
developmental toxicity studies and a 2-generation reproduction toxicity
study in rats. No developmental effects were observed at the HDT in the
rabbit developmental toxicity study, and no developmental or
reproductive toxicity was observed in the developmental (1-generation)
rat study. In the 2-generation rat reproduction study, both decreased
pup viability and parental mortality were observed, but only at a dose
approaching 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 imazosulfuron is largely complete,
lacking only an immunotoxicity study. EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data for imazosulfuron and determined that an additional
database uncertainty factor is not needed to account for potential
immunotoxicity. The most sensitive endpoint in the database is moderate
thyroid hypertrophy. Liver toxicity accompanied by body weight and food
consumption effects is seen throughout the toxicology database. No
treatment-related changes indicative of potential immunotoxicity were
seen in hematology parameters, organ weights (thymus, spleen), gross
necropsy (enlarged lymph nodes) or histopathology (spleen, thymus,
lymph nodes) when tested up to the limit dose in mice and rats.
Therefore, EPA does not believe that conducting a special series
870.7800 immunotoxicity study will result in a NOAEL less than 75 mg/
kg/day, which is presently used as the point of departure for chronic
risk assessment.
ii. No neurotoxic effects were observed during the subchronic
screening battery or noted as clinical signs in any other repeated-dose
study. Although untoward clinical signs were observed in the acute
neurotoxicity study, these effects can be attributed to generalized
toxicity and were resolved by Day 2 of the study. Based on these
considerations, there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity
study or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that imazosulfuron 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.
[[Page 81883]]
iv. There are no significant residual uncertainties in the exposure
databases. Data have been requested to confirm the stability of
imazosulfuron during frozen storage and the metabolic profile of
pyrimidine-labeled imazosulfuron in rice grain in the confined
rotational crop trial. A field rotational crop study is also required
for grain (wheat); however, as explained in Unit III.D.3.iv.c., EPA
does not expect these studies to have a measurable impact on exposure
estimates for imazosulfuron.
a. Storage stability. The final reports of the storage stability
studies must be submitted, reflecting frozen storage intervals of up to
11.8 months for peppers, up to 34.5 months for rice grain, and up to
17.3 months for tomatoes. Interim data suggest that imazosulfuron is
stable in frozen storage, and similar sulfonylurea chemicals are known
to be stable. Therefore, EPA expects imazosulfuron to be stable in
frozen storage but is requiring the final study reports as
confirmation.
b. Metabolic profile. The HPLC profile for the pyrimidinyl (Py)-
label grain storage stability analysis must be submitted to confirm
that the metabolite profile was stable in Py-label grain. Grain samples
from the confined rotational crop study were stored for a relatively
long interval (9 months) prior to completion of the analyses. Analysis
of an imidozolyl (Im)-label sample after the 9-month period yielded a
metabolic profile similar to that of a sample analyzed at the start of
the period. A similar comparison must be made for the Py-label sample
of grain. This is of no practical consequence for risk assessment
because total residue levels on grain were small (<0.01 ppm at a 365-
day plantback interval), imazosulfuron was not present, and no
metabolites/degradates were considered toxicologically significant.
c. Field accumulation in rotational crops (grain). The grain
(wheat) rotational crop study is needed to identify maximum levels of
residues in grain and livestock feed items (forage, straw) as a
function of the plantback interval. On an interim basis, a plantback
interval of 12 months is being required for grains and soybeans. The
results of the rotational crop study may allow a shorter plantback
interval. The confined rotational crop study showed that imazosulfuron
and metabolites will be negligible (<0.01 ppm) on forage, hay, straw,
stover, and grain at a 365-day plantback interval and will, therefore,
make no contribution to dietary exposure.
The dietary food exposure assessments were performed assuming
tolerance-level residues and 100 PCT for all commodities. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water
modeling used to assess exposure to imazosulfuron in drinking water.
EPA used similarly conservative assumptions to assess postapplication
exposure of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed
by imazosulfuron.
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. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit
for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water to
imazosulfuron will occupy 1.4% of the aPAD for infants less than 1 year
old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
imazosulfuron from food and water will utilize 2.7% of the cPAD for
infants less than 1 year old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
imazosulfuron is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Imazosulfuron
is currently registered for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is
appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with
short-term residential exposures to imazosulfuron.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 40,000 for adults
and 7,000 for children. For adults, the aggregate MOE includes short-
term residential handler inhalation exposure plus chronic dietary
exposure to imazosulfuron from food and water. For children, the
aggregate MOE includes short-term incidental oral residential exposure
plus chronic dietary exposure to imazosulfuron from food and water.
Because EPA's level of concern for imazosulfuron is a MOE of 100 or
below, these MOEs are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
imazosulfuron is not registered for any use patterns that would result
in intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for
imazosulfuron.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, imazosulfuron is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children, from aggregate
exposure to imazosulfuron residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (liquid chromatography/mass
spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) Method RM-42C-3) is available
to enforce the tolerance expression. 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.
[[Page 81884]]
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 imazosulfuron.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
EPA is revising the proposed commodity terms for ``pepper, bell,
fruit''; ``pepper, non-bell, fruit''; and ``tomato, fruit''; to read
``pepper, bell''; ``pepper, non-bell''; and ``tomato''. The commodity
terms have been changed in accordance with the guidance in the Agency's
Food and Feed Commodity Vocabulary.
EPA is also revising the requested tolerance expression to clarify
the chemical moieties that are covered by 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 herbicide imazosulfuron, including its metabolites and degradates,
but that compliance with the tolerance levels is to be determined by
measuring only imazosulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-
pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]imidazo-[1,2-[alpha]]pyridine-3-sulfonamide,
in or on the commodities.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
imazosulfuron, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on
pepper, bell at 0.02 ppm; pepper, non-bell at 0.02 ppm; rice, grain at
0.02 ppm; and tomato at 0.02 ppm. Compliance with the tolerance levels
is to be determined by measuring only imazosulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4,6-
dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]imidazo-[1,2-[alpha]]pyridine-3-
sulfonamide, in or on the commodities.
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 13, 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 180.651 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 180.651 Imazosulfuron; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
herbicide imazosulfuron, including its metabolites and degradates, in
or on the following commodities. Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified in the following table below is to be determined by measuring
only imazosulfuron, 2-chloro-N-[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-
pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]imidazo-[1,2-[alpha]]pyridine-3-sulfonamide,
in or on the commodity.
[[Page 81885]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pepper, bell............................................... 0.02
Pepper, non-bell........................................... 0.02
Rice, grain................................................ 0.02
Tomato..................................................... 0.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2010-32451 Filed 12-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P