Glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine); Pesticide Tolerances, 19701-19706 [2011-8428]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
2. Add § 165.T01–0992 to read as
follows:
■
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
§ 165.T01–0992 Safety Zone; Repair of
High Voltage Transmission Lines to Logan
International Airport; Saugus River,
Saugus, MA.
(a) General. A temporary safety zone
is established for the event described in
paragraph (a)(1):
(1) Repair of high voltage
transmission lines to Logan
International Airport; Saugus River,
Saugus, MA.
(i) All waters of the Saugus River,
from surface to bottom, within a 250yard radius of position 42°26′ 42″ N;
070°58′ 14″ W.
(ii) Effective Period. This rule is
effective May 9, 2011 to October 10,
2011.
(iii) Enforcement Period. This rule
will be enforced during a consecutive 48
hour period to begin each day at 9 a.m.
and end at 2 p.m. with notice of the
enforcement of this safety zone to be
made by all means to affect the widest
publicity among the affected segments
of the public, including publication of a
Notice of Enforcement in the Federal
Register, in the Local Notice to
Mariners, and in the Safety Marine
Information Broadcast.
(b) Regulations.
(1) In accordance with the general
regulations in Section 165.23 of this
part, entry into, transiting or anchoring
within this regulated area is prohibited
unless authorized by the COTP Boston,
or his designated on-scene
representative.
(2) This safety zone is closed to all
vessel traffic, except as may be
permitted by the COTP Boston or the
designated on-scene representative.
(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of
the Captain of the Port Boston is any
Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or
petty officer who has been designated
by the Captain of the Port Boston to act
on his behalf. The on-scene
representative will be aboard either a
Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary
vessel. The COTP or the designated on
scene representative may be contacted
by telephone at 617–223–5750 or on
VHF Channel 16.
(4) Persons and vessels desiring to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the regulated area may do
so if they obtain permission from the
COTP or the designated representative
by contacting the COTP Sector Boston
by telephone at 617–223–5750 or VHF
radio channel 16.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
Dated: March 25, 2011.
John N. Healey,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Boston.
[FR Doc. 2011–8372 Filed 4–7–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0988; FRL–8866–8]
Glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl)
glycine); Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation replaces the
established tolerance for residues of
glyphosate in or on sweet corn, grain
with corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with
husk removed and reduces the
established tolerance for residues of
glyphosate and N-acetyl-glyphosate in
or on poultry, meat. Monsanto Company
requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
SUMMARY:
This regulation is effective April
8, 2011. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
June 7, 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).
DATES:
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2009–0988. 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.
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19701
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kable Bo Davis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 306–0415; e-mail address:
kable.davis@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to those engaged in the
following activities:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2009–0988 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 June 7, 2011. Addresses for mail
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
19702
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
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–2009–0988, by one of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001.
• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket
Facility’s normal hours of operation
(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information. The
Docket Facility telephone number is
(703) 305–5805.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of March 24,
2010 (75 FR 14154–14157) (FRL–8815–
6), 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 9F7644) by
Monsanto Company, 1300 I St., NW.,
Suite 450 East, Washington, DC 20052.
The petition requested that 40 CFR part
180 be amended by replacing the
established tolerances for residues of the
herbicide, glyphosate, in or on sweet
corn, grain with the following: Corn,
sweet, kernel plus cob with husk
removed at a tolerance level of 3.0 parts
per million (ppm) and corn, sweet,
forage at a tolerance level of 9.0 ppm.
The petition also requested a reduction
in the established tolerance for residues
of glyphosate and its metabolite (Nacetyl-glyphosate) in or poultry meat
from 4.0 ppm to 0.1 ppm, as they
believe the tolerance level was
inadvertently increased when the
poultry tolerances were moved from 40
CFR 180.364 (a)(1) to (a)(2). There were
no comments received in response to
the notice of filing.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA is revising
the requested actions in several
respects. EPA has concluded that a
tolerance for residues of glyphosate in
or on corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with
husk removed should be set at 3.5 ppm,
not 3.0 ppm. Since the proposed forage
tolerance is less than the currently
established tolerance for this
commodity, EPA has concluded that a
revision to the currently established
forage tolerance is unnecessary. EPA is
also modifying the tolerance expression
for 40 CFR 180.364(a)(1) and (a)(2) to
clarify the coverage of the tolerance and
the compounds to be measured in
determining compliance with tolerance
levels. The reasons for these changes are
explained in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. * * *’’
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, and the factors specified in
section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for glyphosate
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with glyphosate 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
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
Glyphosate is of low acute toxicity
following oral, dermal, and inhalation
exposure. It is a mild eye irritant, slight
skin irritant, and is not a dermal
sensitizer in guinea pigs. Inhalation risk
assessments are not required based on
the low toxicity of the formulation
products (toxicity category III or IV) and
the physical characteristics of the
technical product. An acute dose and
endpoint for assessing acute risk have
not been selected for any population
subgroups because no effect that could
be attributed to a single exposure (dose)
was observed in oral toxicity studies
including the developmental toxicity
studies in rats and rabbits.
A chronic feeding/carcinogenicity
study in rats found no systemic effects
in any of the parameters examined
(body weight, food consumption,
clinical signs, mortality, clinical
pathology, organ weights, and
histopathology). In a second chronic
feeding/carcinogenicity study in rats
tested at higher dietary levels, a lowestobserved-adverse-effect level (LOAEL)
was identified at 940-milligrams/
kilograms/day (mg/kg/day) & 1,183-mg/
kg/day (male/female) based on
decreased body-weight gains in females
and increased incidence of cataracts and
lens abnormalities, decreased urinary
pH, increased absolute liver weight, and
increased relative liver weight/brain
weight in males. No evidence of
carcinogenicity was found in rats or
mice. In a chronic toxicity study in
dogs, no systemic effects were found.
Acceptable developmental toxicity
studies in the rat and rabbit are
available, as is an acceptable 2generation reproduction study in the rat.
No significant reproductive and
developmental toxic effects were found.
A focal tubular dilation of the kidneys
was observed in a 3-generation
reproductive study on rats at the 30-mg/
kg/day high dose treatment level
(HDTL), however a 2-generational
reproductive study on rats did not
observe the same effect at the 1,500-mg/
kg/day HDTL, nor were any adverse
reproductive effects observed at any
dose level. EPA concluded that the focal
tubular dilation of the kidneys at the 30mg/kg/day level was a spurious rather
than a glyphosate-related effect.
In a prenatal developmental toxicity
study in rats, maternal (systemic) effects
observed included mortality, increased
clinical signs, and reduced body-weight
gain at the HDTL (3,500-mg/kg/day).
Developmental (fetal) effects were
observed only in the high-dose group
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
and included decreases in total
implantations/dam and nonviable
fetuses/dam, increased number of litters
and fetuses with unossified sternebrae,
and decreased mean fetal body weights.
In a prenatal developmental toxicity
study in rabbits, maternal (systemic)
effects observed included mortality and
clinical signs of toxicity at the HDTL
(350-mg/kg/day). In the rabbits,
developmental toxicity was not
observed at any dose. On the basis of
developmental studies in rats and
rabbits and reproductive findings in
rats, glyphosate exhibited no evidence
of increased susceptibility of offspring.
Neurotoxicity has not been observed
in any of the acute, subchronic, chronic,
developmental, or reproductive studies
performed with glyphosate.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by glyphosate 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
titled ‘‘Glyphosate. Section 3
Registration for Application of the
Potassium Salt of Glyphosate to
Glyphosate-Tolerant Sweet Corn.
Human-Health Risk Assessment,’’ pp.
26–27 in docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2009–0988.
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 (LOC) 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
19703
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which the NOAEL 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)
(a = acute c = chronic) or a reference
dose (RfD)—and a safe margin of
exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for glyphosate used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR GLYPHOSATE FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Exposure/scenario
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety factors
Acute dietary ............................
Chronic dietary (All populations).
RfD, PAD, LOC for risk
assessment
An endpoint of concern (effect) attributable to a single dose was not identified in the database.
NOAEL= 175 ..........................
mg/kg/day UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
NOAEL= 175 ..........................
mg/kg/day UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
NOAEL= 175 ..........................
mg/kg/day UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
None .......................................
None .......................................
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30
days) Inhalation (1 to 6
months).
None .......................................
None .......................................
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).
None .......................................
None .......................................
Incidental oral short-term (1 to
30 days).
Incidental oral intermediateterm (1 to 6 months).
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
Dermal short-term (1 to 30
days) Dermal intermediateterm (1 to 6 months).
Study and toxicological effects
Chronic RfD = 1.75 mg/kg/day
cPAD = 1.75 mg/kg/day.
LOC for MOE = < 100 ............
LOC for MOE = < 100 ............
Developmental Toxicity Study—Rabbit: Maternal LOAEL = 350 mg/kg/day based on
diarrhea, nasal discharge and death in maternal animals.
Developmental Toxicity Study—Rabbit: Maternal LOAEL = 350 mg/kg/day based on
diarrhea, nasal discharge and death in maternal animals.
Developmental Toxicity Study—Rabbit: Maternal LOAEL = 350 mg/kg/day based on
diarrhea, nasal discharge and death in maternal animals.
Based on the lack of toxicity up to the highest dose tested (1,000 mg/kg/day) in the
21 day dermal toxicity study in rabbits and
the lack of concern for developmental and
reproductive effects, the quantification of
dermal risks was not conducted.
Based on the lack of toxicity up to the highest concentration tested (0.36 mg/L) in the
28-day inhalation toxicity study in rats, and
the physical characteristics of the technical,
the quantification of inhalation risks was
not conducted.
No evidence of carcinogenicity.
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.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to glyphosate, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
glyphosate tolerances in 40 CFR
180.364. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from glyphosate in food as
follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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.
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
19704
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
No such effects were identified in the
toxicological studies for glyphosate;
therefore, a quantitative acute dietary
exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the United States Department of
Agriculture Continuing Survey of Food
Intake by Individuals (USDA CSFII)
(1994–1996 and 1998). The chronic
analysis assumed tolerance-level
residues, 100 percent crop treated
(PCT), and Dietary Exposure Evaluation
Model (DEEM (version 7.81)) default
processing factors and incorporated
glyphosate drinking water monitoring
data.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that glyphosate does not pose
a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a
dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used monitoring data
from the United States Geological
Survey (USGS) National Water-Quality
Assessment Program (NAWQA) to
calculate drinking water exposure. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration of value 13.5 parts
per million (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).
The sweet corn use is not anticipated
to result in residential exposure.
However, residential exposure is
anticipated from the registered
broadcast and spot treatment to
residential lawns, gardens, and
recreational areas including parks and
golf courses. Based on the registered
residential use patterns, there is a
potential for short-term and
intermediate-term dermal and
inhalation exposures to homeowners
who mix and apply products containing
glyphosate. Since short- and
intermediate-term dermal and
inhalation endpoints were not selected,
no residential handler/applicator
exposure assessment was conducted.
Post-application dermal and inhalation
exposure assessments were not
conducted since short- and
intermediate-term dermal and
inhalation endpoints were not selected.
Based on registered use patterns,
toddlers may have short-term postapplication incidental oral exposure
from hand-to-mouth, object to mouth,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
and soil ingestion behavior on treated
lawns and swimmers may have shortterm post-application incidental oral
exposures from treated surface water.
Exposures and risks from these
scenarios were assessed because an
applicable endpoint was identified.
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 glyphosate to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
glyphosate does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that glyphosate 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 SF. In applying this provision,
EPA either retains the default value of
10X, or uses a different additional safety
factor when reliable data available to
EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There is no quantitative or qualitative
evidence of increased susceptibility of
rats or rabbit fetuses to in utero
exposure in developmental studies. A
focal tubular dilation of the kidneys was
observed in a 3-generation reproductive
study on rats at the 30-mg/kg/day
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
HDTL, however a 2-generational
reproductive study on rats did not
observe the same effect at the 1,500-mg/
kg/day HDTL, nor were any adverse
reproductive effects observed at any
dose level. A clear NOAEL was
established and the chronic reference
dose was set at a level well below (∼17fold) this effect. Therefore, the
endpoints selected for risk assessment
are protective of the effects seen in the
3-generation rat reproduction study.
There are no residual uncertainties for
pre- or postnatal toxicity.
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 is complete
with the exception of recently-required
studies on acute and subchronic
neuorotoxicity and immunotoxicity.
There is no evidence of neurotoxicity in
any of the toxicology studies.
Accordingly, although an acute and
subchronic neurotoxicity studies are
now required as part of new data
requirements, EPA does not believe that
conducting these studies will result in
a lower POD than that currently used for
overall risk assessment, and therefore, a
database uncertainty factor is not
needed to account for lack of these
studies.
ii. The toxicology database for
glyphosate does not show any evidence
of treatment-related effects on the
immune system. The overall weight of
evidence suggests that this chemical
does not directly target the immune
system. Accordingly, although an
immunotoxicity study is required as a
part of the new data requirements in the
40 CFR part 158 for conventional
pesticide registration, EPA does not
believe that conducting a functional
immunotoxicity study will result in a
lower POD than that currently use for
overall risk assessment, and therefore, a
data base uncertainty factor is not
needed to account for lack of this study.
iii. There is no quantitative or
qualitative evidence of increased
susceptibility of rats or rabbit fetuses to
in utero exposure in developmental
studies.
iv. The dietary exposure analysis of
exposure to glyphosate in food is
conservative as it assumed tolerance
level residues and 100 PCT. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the water modeling used to assess
exposure to glyphosate in drinking
water. EPA used similarly conservative
assumptions to assess postapplication
exposure of children as well as
incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by glyphosate.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the aPAD and cPAD. For
linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the
lifetime probability of acquiring cancer
given the estimated aggregate exposure.
Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account acute
exposure estimates from dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, glyphosate is not
expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to glyphosate
from food and water will utilize 12% of
the cPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in
Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of glyphosate 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).
Glyphosate 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 glyphosate.
Short-term incidental oral exposure
may occur to young children (swimmer
and turf non-dietary ingestion) and
adults (swimmers). For young children,
short-term aggregate exposure includes
chronic dietary (food and water) and
incidental oral ingestion exposure
resulting from the turf use (highest
exposure of all possible scenarios). For
adults, short-term aggregate exposure
includes chronic dietary exposure (food
and water) and incidental oral ingestion
exposure resulting from the aquatic use
(highest exposure of all possible
scenarios). See Table 6.0.1 in the
document titled ‘‘Glyphosate. Section 3
Registration for Application of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
Potassium Salt of Glyphosate to
Glyphosate-Tolerant Sweet Corn.
Human-Health Risk Assessment’’ in
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–
0988 for a summary of the short-term
aggregate exposures and risk estimates
(the populations included represent
those with the highest dietary
exposures). For glyphosate, the LOC is
for MOEs below 100. Since the aggregate
MOEs are ≥720, short-term aggregate
exposure to glyphosate does not pose a
risk of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Since the
short-/intermediate-term incidental oral
endpoints are identical, the short-term
risk assessments are protective of
intermediate-term exposure.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
glyphosate 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 glyphosate
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC) equipped with
a fluorescence detector method; LOQ =
0.05 ppm) is available to enforce the
tolerance expression.
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 any
MRLs for sweet corn commodities;
however, it has established an MRL for
residues of glyphosate, per se, in/on
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19705
poultry, meat at 0.05 ppm. The U.S.
tolerance of 0.10 ppm for poultry, meat
is necessarily higher than the Codex
MRL to account for residues of both
gyphosate and its metabolite N-acetyl
glyphosate. N-acetyl glyphosate is found
in genetically modified (GMO)
glyphosate-resistant commodities,
including corn and soybeans; that are
used as feed items for poultry in the
U.S. Therefore, it is included in the U.S.
tolerance expression for poultry but not
the Codex expression, accounting for
the difference in the established MRLs.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
EPA has concluded that a tolerance
for residues of glyphosate in or on corn,
sweet, kernel plus cob with husk
removed at 3.5 ppm is needed because
the highest residue from the field trials
was 3.1 ppm. Since the proposed forage
tolerance (9 ppm) is less than the
currently established tolerance for this
commodity (100 ppm), EPA has
concluded that a revision to the
currently established tolerance is
unnecessary.
Finally, EPA is revising the tolerance
expressions in 40 CFR 180.364(a)(1) and
40 CFR 180.364(a)(2) to clarify the
chemical moieties that are covered by
the tolerances and specify clearly how
compliance with the tolerances is to be
measured.
V. Conclusion
Therefore this regulation changes the
established tolerance for residues of
glyphosate in or on corn, sweet, grain (at
0.1 ppm) to 3.5 ppm for residues of
glyphosate in or on corn, sweet, kernel
plus cob with the husk removed. This
regulation reduces the established
tolerance for residues of glyphosate and
N-acetyl-glyphosate in or on poultry,
meat from 4.0 ppm to 0.10 ppm. This
regulation also changes the tolerance
expression for 40 CFR 180.364(a)(1) and
(a)(2).
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
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
19706
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:58 Apr 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
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.
(2) Tolerances are established for
residues of glyphosate, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities listed below resulting from
the application of glyphosate, the
isopropylamine salt of glyphosate, the
ethanolamine salt of glyphosate, the
dimethylamine salt of glyphosate, the
ammonium salt of glyphosate, and the
potassium salt of glyphosate.
Compliance with the following
tolerance levels is to be determined by
measuring only glyphosate (N(phosphonomethyl)glycine) and its
metabolite N-acetyl-glyphosate (Nacetyl-N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine;
calculated as the stoichiometric
equivalent of glyphosate).
Dated: March 29, 2011.
G. Jeffery Herndon,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Poultry, meat ............................
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
*
PART 180—[AMENDED]
*
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.10
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–8428 Filed 4–7–11; 8:45 am]
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.364 is amended by:
i. Revising the introductory text in
paragraph (a)(1), and in the table, revise
the entry for corn, sweet, grain 0.1 ppm;
to corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with
husk removed at 3.5 ppm; and
ii. Revising the introductory text in
paragraph (a)(2), and in the table, revise
the entry for poultry, meat 4.0 ppm to
0.10 ppm. The revisions read as follows:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
■
§ 180.364.
residues.
Glyphosate; tolerances for
46 CFR Parts 520 and 532
[Docket No. 10–03]
RIN 3072–AC38
Non-Vessel-Operating Common Carrier
Negotiated Rate Arrangements;
Correction
April 5, 2011.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are
established for residues of glyphosate,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities
listed below resulting from the
application of glyphosate, the
isopropylamine salt of glyphosate, the
ethanolamine salt of glyphosate, the
dimethylamine salt of glyphosate, the
ammonium salt of glyphosate, and the
potassium salt of glyphosate.
Compliance with the following
tolerance levels is to be determined by
measuring only glyphosate (N(phosphonomethyl)glycine).
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob
with husk removed ................
*
PO 00000
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION
Frm 00024
*
*
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
*
ACTION:
The Federal Maritime
Commission is correcting a final rule
that appeared in the Federal Register on
March 2, 2011, exempting licensed nonvessel-operating common carriers that
enter into negotiated rate arrangements
from the tariff rate publication
requirements of the Shipping Act of
1984. This correction clarifies that the
negotiated rate arrangement must be
agreed to prior to receipt of the cargo
and removes the requirement that nonvessel-operating common carriers
indicate their intention to move cargo
under negotiated rate arrangements on
their Form FMC–1 on file with the
Commission.
SUMMARY:
DATES:
3.5
*
Federal Maritime Commission.
Final rule; correction.
AGENCY:
Effective April 18, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Legal Information: Elisa Holland, 202–
523–5740, generalcounsel@fmc.gov;
E:\FR\FM\08APR1.SGM
08APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 68 (Friday, April 8, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19701-19706]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8428]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0988; FRL-8866-8]
Glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine); Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation replaces the established tolerance for
residues of glyphosate in or on sweet corn, grain with corn, sweet,
kernel plus cob with husk removed and reduces the established tolerance
for residues of glyphosate and N-acetyl-glyphosate in or on poultry,
meat. Monsanto Company requested these tolerances under the Federal
Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective April 8, 2011. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before June 7, 2011, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0988. 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: Kable Bo Davis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 306-0415; e-mail address: kable.davis@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those
engaged in the following activities:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to
provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by
this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in
determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0988 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
June 7, 2011. Addresses for mail
[[Page 19702]]
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-2009-0988, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of March 24, 2010 (75 FR 14154-14157) (FRL-
8815-6), 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
9F7644) by Monsanto Company, 1300 I St., NW., Suite 450 East,
Washington, DC 20052. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be
amended by replacing the established tolerances for residues of the
herbicide, glyphosate, in or on sweet corn, grain with the following:
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husk removed at a tolerance level of
3.0 parts per million (ppm) and corn, sweet, forage at a tolerance
level of 9.0 ppm. The petition also requested a reduction in the
established tolerance for residues of glyphosate and its metabolite (N-
acetyl-glyphosate) in or poultry meat from 4.0 ppm to 0.1 ppm, as they
believe the tolerance level was inadvertently increased when the
poultry tolerances were moved from 40 CFR 180.364 (a)(1) to (a)(2).
There were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
revising the requested actions in several respects. EPA has concluded
that a tolerance for residues of glyphosate in or on corn, sweet,
kernel plus cob with husk removed should be set at 3.5 ppm, not 3.0
ppm. Since the proposed forage tolerance is less than the currently
established tolerance for this commodity, EPA has concluded that a
revision to the currently established forage tolerance is unnecessary.
EPA is also modifying the tolerance expression for 40 CFR 180.364(a)(1)
and (a)(2) to clarify the coverage of the tolerance and the compounds
to be measured in determining compliance with tolerance levels. The
reasons for these changes are explained in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. * *
*''
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure for glyphosate including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with glyphosate
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.
Glyphosate is of low acute toxicity following oral, dermal, and
inhalation exposure. It is a mild eye irritant, slight skin irritant,
and is not a dermal sensitizer in guinea pigs. Inhalation risk
assessments are not required based on the low toxicity of the
formulation products (toxicity category III or IV) and the physical
characteristics of the technical product. An acute dose and endpoint
for assessing acute risk have not been selected for any population
subgroups because no effect that could be attributed to a single
exposure (dose) was observed in oral toxicity studies including the
developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits.
A chronic feeding/carcinogenicity study in rats found no systemic
effects in any of the parameters examined (body weight, food
consumption, clinical signs, mortality, clinical pathology, organ
weights, and histopathology). In a second chronic feeding/
carcinogenicity study in rats tested at higher dietary levels, a
lowest-observed-adverse-effect level (LOAEL) was identified at 940-
milligrams/kilograms/day (mg/kg/day) & 1,183-mg/kg/day (male/female)
based on decreased body-weight gains in females and increased incidence
of cataracts and lens abnormalities, decreased urinary pH, increased
absolute liver weight, and increased relative liver weight/brain weight
in males. No evidence of carcinogenicity was found in rats or mice. In
a chronic toxicity study in dogs, no systemic effects were found.
Acceptable developmental toxicity studies in the rat and rabbit are
available, as is an acceptable 2-generation reproduction study in the
rat. No significant reproductive and developmental toxic effects were
found. A focal tubular dilation of the kidneys was observed in a 3-
generation reproductive study on rats at the 30-mg/kg/day high dose
treatment level (HDTL), however a 2-generational reproductive study on
rats did not observe the same effect at the 1,500-mg/kg/day HDTL, nor
were any adverse reproductive effects observed at any dose level. EPA
concluded that the focal tubular dilation of the kidneys at the 30-mg/
kg/day level was a spurious rather than a glyphosate-related effect.
In a prenatal developmental toxicity study in rats, maternal
(systemic) effects observed included mortality, increased clinical
signs, and reduced body-weight gain at the HDTL (3,500-mg/kg/day).
Developmental (fetal) effects were observed only in the high-dose group
[[Page 19703]]
and included decreases in total implantations/dam and nonviable
fetuses/dam, increased number of litters and fetuses with unossified
sternebrae, and decreased mean fetal body weights. In a prenatal
developmental toxicity study in rabbits, maternal (systemic) effects
observed included mortality and clinical signs of toxicity at the HDTL
(350-mg/kg/day). In the rabbits, developmental toxicity was not
observed at any dose. On the basis of developmental studies in rats and
rabbits and reproductive findings in rats, glyphosate exhibited no
evidence of increased susceptibility of offspring.
Neurotoxicity has not been observed in any of the acute,
subchronic, chronic, developmental, or reproductive studies performed
with glyphosate.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by glyphosate 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 titled ``Glyphosate. Section 3
Registration for Application of the Potassium Salt of Glyphosate to
Glyphosate-Tolerant Sweet Corn. Human-Health Risk Assessment,'' pp. 26-
27 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0988.
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 (LOC) to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to
the pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is
no appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which the NOAEL 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) (a = acute c = chronic) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for glyphosate used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Glyphosate 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........................ An endpoint of concern (effect) attributable to a single dose was not
identified in the database.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations).... NOAEL= 175............. Chronic RfD = 1.75 mg/ Developmental Toxicity
mg/kg/day UFA = 10x.... kg/day cPAD = 1.75 mg/ Study--Rabbit:
UFH = 10x.............. kg/day. Maternal LOAEL = 350
FQPA SF = 1x........... mg/kg/day based on
diarrhea, nasal
discharge and death in
maternal animals.
Incidental oral short-term (1 to 30 NOAEL= 175............. LOC for MOE = < 100.... Developmental Toxicity
days). mg/kg/day UFA = 10x.... Study--Rabbit:
UFH = 10x.............. Maternal LOAEL = 350
FQPA SF = 1x........... mg/kg/day based on
diarrhea, nasal
discharge and death in
maternal animals.
Incidental oral intermediate-term (1 NOAEL= 175............. LOC for MOE = < 100.... Developmental Toxicity
to 6 months). mg/kg/day UFA = 10x.... Study--Rabbit:
UFH = 10x.............. Maternal LOAEL = 350
FQPA SF = 1x........... mg/kg/day based on
diarrhea, nasal
discharge and death in
maternal animals.
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days) None................... None................... Based on the lack of
Dermal intermediate-term (1 to 6 toxicity up to the
months). highest dose tested
(1,000 mg/kg/day) in
the 21 day dermal
toxicity study in
rabbits and the lack
of concern for
developmental and
reproductive effects,
the quantification of
dermal risks was not
conducted.
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 days) None................... None................... Based on the lack of
Inhalation (1 to 6 months). toxicity up to the
highest concentration
tested (0.36 mg/L) in
the 28-day inhalation
toxicity study in
rats, and the physical
characteristics of the
technical, the
quantification of
inhalation risks was
not conducted.
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).... None................... None................... No evidence of
carcinogenicity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to glyphosate, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing glyphosate tolerances in 40 CFR
180.364. EPA assessed dietary exposures from glyphosate 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.
[[Page 19704]]
No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for
glyphosate; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment
is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the United States
Department of Agriculture Continuing Survey of Food Intake by
Individuals (USDA CSFII) (1994-1996 and 1998). The chronic analysis
assumed tolerance-level residues, 100 percent crop treated (PCT), and
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM (version 7.81)) default
processing factors and incorporated glyphosate drinking water
monitoring data.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that glyphosate does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used monitoring
data from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Water-
Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA) to calculate drinking water
exposure. For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration
of value 13.5 parts per million (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).
The sweet corn use is not anticipated to result in residential
exposure. However, residential exposure is anticipated from the
registered broadcast and spot treatment to residential lawns, gardens,
and recreational areas including parks and golf courses. Based on the
registered residential use patterns, there is a potential for short-
term and intermediate-term dermal and inhalation exposures to
homeowners who mix and apply products containing glyphosate. Since
short- and intermediate-term dermal and inhalation endpoints were not
selected, no residential handler/applicator exposure assessment was
conducted. Post-application dermal and inhalation exposure assessments
were not conducted since short- and intermediate-term dermal and
inhalation endpoints were not selected. Based on registered use
patterns, toddlers may have short-term post-application incidental oral
exposure from hand-to-mouth, object to mouth, and soil ingestion
behavior on treated lawns and swimmers may have short-term post-
application incidental oral exposures from treated surface water.
Exposures and risks from these scenarios were assessed because an
applicable endpoint was identified. 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 glyphosate to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and glyphosate does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
glyphosate 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 SF. In
applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X,
or uses a different additional safety factor when reliable data
available to EPA support the choice of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no quantitative or
qualitative evidence of increased susceptibility of rats or rabbit
fetuses to in utero exposure in developmental studies. A focal tubular
dilation of the kidneys was observed in a 3-generation reproductive
study on rats at the 30-mg/kg/day HDTL, however a 2-generational
reproductive study on rats did not observe the same effect at the
1,500-mg/kg/day HDTL, nor were any adverse reproductive effects
observed at any dose level. A clear NOAEL was established and the
chronic reference dose was set at a level well below (~17-fold) this
effect. Therefore, the endpoints selected for risk assessment are
protective of the effects seen in the 3-generation rat reproduction
study. There are no residual uncertainties for pre- or postnatal
toxicity.
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 is complete with the exception of
recently-required studies on acute and subchronic neuorotoxicity and
immunotoxicity. There is no evidence of neurotoxicity in any of the
toxicology studies. Accordingly, although an acute and subchronic
neurotoxicity studies are now required as part of new data
requirements, EPA does not believe that conducting these studies will
result in a lower POD than that currently used for overall risk
assessment, and therefore, a database uncertainty factor is not needed
to account for lack of these studies.
ii. The toxicology database for glyphosate does not show any
evidence of treatment-related effects on the immune system. The overall
weight of evidence suggests that this chemical does not directly target
the immune system. Accordingly, although an immunotoxicity study is
required as a part of the new data requirements in the 40 CFR part 158
for conventional pesticide registration, EPA does not believe that
conducting a functional immunotoxicity study will result in a lower POD
than that currently use for overall risk assessment, and therefore, a
data base uncertainty factor is not needed to account for lack of this
study.
iii. There is no quantitative or qualitative evidence of increased
susceptibility of rats or rabbit fetuses to in utero exposure in
developmental studies.
iv. The dietary exposure analysis of exposure to glyphosate in food
is conservative as it assumed tolerance level residues and 100 PCT. EPA
made conservative (protective) assumptions in the water modeling used
to assess exposure to glyphosate in drinking water. EPA used similarly
conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure of children
as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
[[Page 19705]]
These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed
by glyphosate.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
aPAD and cPAD. For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the estimated aggregate exposure.
Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by
comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, and residential exposure
to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
glyphosate is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
glyphosate from food and water will utilize 12% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
glyphosate 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).
Glyphosate 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 glyphosate.
Short-term incidental oral exposure may occur to young children
(swimmer and turf non-dietary ingestion) and adults (swimmers). For
young children, short-term aggregate exposure includes chronic dietary
(food and water) and incidental oral ingestion exposure resulting from
the turf use (highest exposure of all possible scenarios). For adults,
short-term aggregate exposure includes chronic dietary exposure (food
and water) and incidental oral ingestion exposure resulting from the
aquatic use (highest exposure of all possible scenarios). See Table
6.0.1 in the document titled ``Glyphosate. Section 3 Registration for
Application of the Potassium Salt of Glyphosate to Glyphosate-Tolerant
Sweet Corn. Human-Health Risk Assessment'' in docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2009-0988 for a summary of the short-term aggregate exposures and
risk estimates (the populations included represent those with the
highest dietary exposures). For glyphosate, the LOC is for MOEs below
100. Since the aggregate MOEs are >=720, short-term aggregate exposure
to glyphosate does not pose a risk of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Since the short-/intermediate-term
incidental oral endpoints are identical, the short-term risk
assessments are protective of intermediate-term exposure.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, glyphosate 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 glyphosate residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC) equipped with a fluorescence detector method; LOQ
= 0.05 ppm) is available to enforce the tolerance expression.
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 any MRLs for sweet corn commodities;
however, it has established an MRL for residues of glyphosate, per se,
in/on poultry, meat at 0.05 ppm. The U.S. tolerance of 0.10 ppm for
poultry, meat is necessarily higher than the Codex MRL to account for
residues of both gyphosate and its metabolite N-acetyl glyphosate. N-
acetyl glyphosate is found in genetically modified (GMO) glyphosate-
resistant commodities, including corn and soybeans; that are used as
feed items for poultry in the U.S. Therefore, it is included in the
U.S. tolerance expression for poultry but not the Codex expression,
accounting for the difference in the established MRLs.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
EPA has concluded that a tolerance for residues of glyphosate in or
on corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husk removed at 3.5 ppm is needed
because the highest residue from the field trials was 3.1 ppm. Since
the proposed forage tolerance (9 ppm) is less than the currently
established tolerance for this commodity (100 ppm), EPA has concluded
that a revision to the currently established tolerance is unnecessary.
Finally, EPA is revising the tolerance expressions in 40 CFR
180.364(a)(1) and 40 CFR 180.364(a)(2) to clarify the chemical moieties
that are covered by the tolerances and specify clearly how compliance
with the tolerances is to be measured.
V. Conclusion
Therefore this regulation changes the established tolerance for
residues of glyphosate in or on corn, sweet, grain (at 0.1 ppm) to 3.5
ppm for residues of glyphosate in or on corn, sweet, kernel plus cob
with the husk removed. This regulation reduces the established
tolerance for residues of glyphosate and N-acetyl-glyphosate in or on
poultry, meat from 4.0 ppm to 0.10 ppm. This regulation also changes
the tolerance expression for 40 CFR 180.364(a)(1) and (a)(2).
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
[[Page 19706]]
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: March 29, 2011.
G. Jeffery Herndon,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
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 180.364 is amended by:
i. Revising the introductory text in paragraph (a)(1), and in the
table, revise the entry for corn, sweet, grain 0.1 ppm; to corn, sweet,
kernel plus cob with husk removed at 3.5 ppm; and
ii. Revising the introductory text in paragraph (a)(2), and in the
table, revise the entry for poultry, meat 4.0 ppm to 0.10 ppm. The
revisions read as follows:
Sec. 180.364. Glyphosate; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of
glyphosate, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities listed below resulting from the application of glyphosate,
the isopropylamine salt of glyphosate, the ethanolamine salt of
glyphosate, the dimethylamine salt of glyphosate, the ammonium salt of
glyphosate, and the potassium salt of glyphosate. Compliance with the
following tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring only
glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husk removed............. 3.5
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Tolerances are established for residues of glyphosate,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities
listed below resulting from the application of glyphosate, the
isopropylamine salt of glyphosate, the ethanolamine salt of glyphosate,
the dimethylamine salt of glyphosate, the ammonium salt of glyphosate,
and the potassium salt of glyphosate. Compliance with the following
tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring only glyphosate (N-
(phosphonomethyl)glycine) and its metabolite N-acetyl-glyphosate (N-
acetyl-N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine; calculated as the stoichiometric
equivalent of glyphosate).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Poultry, meat.............................................. 0.10
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-8428 Filed 4-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P