Triflusulfuron-Methyl; Pesticide Tolerances, 22620-22625 [2011-9849]
Download as PDF
22620
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Inbound Direct Entry Contracts with
Foreign Postal Administrations
(MC2008–6, CP2008–14 and MC2008–
15)
Inbound Direct Entry Contracts with
Foreign Postal Administrations 1
(MC2008–6 and CP2009–62)
International Business Reply Service
Competitive Contract 1 (MC2009–14 and
CP2009–20)
International Business Reply Service
Competitive Contract 2 (MC2010–18,
CP2010–21 and CP2010–22)
Competitive Product Descriptions
Express Mail
Express Mail
Outbound International Expedited Services
Inbound International Expedited Services
Priority
Priority Mail
Outbound Priority Mail International
Inbound Air Parcel Post
Parcel Select
Parcel Return Service
International
International Priority Airlift (IPA)
International Surface Airlift (ISAL)
International Direct Sacks—M-Bags
Global Customized Shipping Services
International Money Transfer Service
Inbound Surface Parcel Post (at non-UPU
rates)
International Ancillary Services
International Certificate of Mailing
International Registered Mail
International Return Receipt
International Restricted Delivery
International Insurance
Negotiated Service Agreements
Domestic
Outbound International
Part C—Glossary of Terms and Conditions
[Reserved]
Part D—Country Price Lists for International
Mail [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2011–9782 Filed 4–21–11; 8:45 am]
June 21, 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).
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2010–0102. 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:
Laura Nollen, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–7390; e-mail address:
nollen.laura@epa.gov.
ADDRESSES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0102; FRL–8871–4]
Triflusulfuron-Methyl; Pesticide
Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of triflusulfuronmethyl in or on beet, garden, roots and
beet, garden, tops. Interregional
Research Project Number 4 (IR–4)
requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective April
22, 2011. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to those engaged in the
following activities:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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–2010–0102 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 21, 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–2010–0102, 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
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Docket Facility telephone number is
(703) 305–5805.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerances
In the Federal Register of March 19,
2010 (75 FR 13277) (FRL–8813–2), 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 9E7669) by IR–4,
500 College Road East, Suite 201 W.,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.492 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the herbicide triflusulfuronmethyl, 2-[[[[[4-(dimethylamino)-6(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy)-1,3,5-triazin-2yl]amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-3methylbenzoate, in or on beet, garden,
roots at 0.01 parts per million (ppm);
and beet, garden, tops at 0.02 ppm. That
notice referenced a summary of the
petition prepared on behalf of IR–4 by
DuPont Crop Protection, the registrant,
which is available in the docket,
https://www.regulations.gov. Comments
were received on the notice of filing.
EPA’s response to these comments is
discussed in Unit IV.C.
EPA has revised the tolerance
expression for all established
commodities to be consistent with
current Agency policy and has made a
technical correction to the chemical
name. The reasons for these changes are
explained in Unit IV.D.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. * * *’’
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, and the factors specified in
section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
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 triflusulfuronmethyl, including exposure resulting
from the tolerances established by this
action. EPA’s assessment of exposures
and risks associated with triflusulfuronmethyl 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.
Triflusulfuron-methyl is of low acute
toxicity when administered orally,
dermally, or via inhalation. It is not a
dermal sensitizer or irritant, and causes
only minor transient irritation to the
eye. The primary target organs
identified for triflusulfuron-methyl are
the liver, testes, and red blood cells.
Hematological and histopathological
changes consistent with mild hemolytic
anemia were observed in the rat and the
dog. Following subchronic and/or
chronic dietary exposure, increased
incidence of testicular interstitial
hyperplasia was observed in the rat, and
testicular atrophy and reduced size were
observed in the dog. Liver effects
including histopathology and increased
weight were observed in the dog and
mouse, but not in the rat.
No evidence of neurotoxicity was
observed except for a statistically
significant increase in sciatic nerve
myelin/axon degeneration in female rats
at the highest dose tested in the rat
combined chronic toxicity/
carcinogenicity study. However, the
incidence was high in all dose groups,
no increases were seen in the interim
sacrifice groups or in shorter-term
studies, and it is commonly observed in
older rats.
In the rat developmental toxicity
study, no developmental effects were
noted, whereas maternal toxicity was
observed (decreased body weight gain,
food consumption and feed efficiency).
Abortions occurred in the rabbit
developmental toxicity study at a dose
that also caused significant maternal
toxicity, including mortality, clinical
signs, sharply reduced food
consumption and decreased weight
gain. In the rat reproductive toxicity
study, decreased parental body weight/
weight gain and offspring weight during
lactation were observed at the mid and
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22621
high doses. No reproductive effects were
observed.
Triflusulfuron-methyl is classified as
a possible human carcinogen (Group C)
under the 1986 Cancer Guidelines,
based on an increased incidence of
benign testicular interstitial cell
adenomas in male rats in the combined
chronic/carcinogenicity toxicity study
and evidence of clastogenicity in some
in vitro genotoxicity studies. A special
mechanistic study that evaluated
hormonal changes in male rats provided
insufficient information to establish a
nonlinear mode of action for the
formation of these tumors. Additionally,
although a statistically significant
incidence of hepatocellular adenomas
was noted in a carcinogenicity study in
mice, it was within the historical
control range and not considered as part
of the weight-of-evidence for
determination of cancer classification.
Because the observed tumors were
benign and found in only one species,
and only at significantly higher dose
levels than the dose selected for the
point of departure, the chronic reference
dose (RfD) is considered protective of
potential carcinogenicity for risk
assessment purposes.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by triflusulfuron-methyl
as well as the no-observed-adverseeffect-level (NOAEL) and the lowestobserved-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL)
from the toxicity studies can be found
at https://www.regulations.gov in
document ‘‘Triflusulfuron-methyl:
Revised Human Health Risk Assessment
for Use in Garden Beet.’’ at pages 34–38
in docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2010–0102.
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
RfD—and a safe margin of exposure
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
22622
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
(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 triflusulfuron-methyl used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR TRIFLUSULFURON-METHYL FOR USE IN HUMAN
HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety factors
Exposure/scenario
Acute dietary (Females 13–49 years of age
and General population, including infants
and children).
Chronic dietary (All populations) ......................
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) .....................
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
Not required. An appropriate endpoint for this risk assessment was not identified.
NOAEL= 2.44 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Chronic RfD = 0.0244
mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.0244 mg/kg/
day.
Chronic oral toxicity/carcinogenicity in the rat
LOAEL = 30.6 mg/kg/day based on decreased
body
weight/weight
gain,
hematological changes (primarily males)
and increased interstitial cell hyperplasia
(males).
Classification: Possible Human Carcinogen (Group C, 1986 Cancer Guidelines), based on increased incidence of testicular interstitial cell adenomas in rats. The RfD is considered adequately protective of these effects.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor.
PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic).
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies).
UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to triflusulfuron-methyl, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing triflusulfuron-methyl tolerances
in 40 CFR 180.492. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from triflusulfuron-methyl in
food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide,
if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1-day or single
exposure. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies
for triflusulfuron-methyl; 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 USDA 1994–
1996 and 1998 Continuing Surveys of
Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII). As
to residue levels in food, EPA utilized
tolerance-level residues and 100 percent
crop treated (PCT) for all commodities.
iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether
quantitative cancer exposure and risk
assessments are appropriate for a fooduse pesticide based on the weight of the
evidence from cancer studies and other
relevant data. Cancer risk is quantified
using a linear or nonlinear approach. If
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
sufficient information on the
carcinogenic mode of action is available,
a threshold or non-linear approach is
used and a cancer RfD is calculated
based on an earlier noncancer key event.
If carcinogenic mode of action data are
not available, or if the mode of action
data determines a mutagenic mode of
action, a default linear cancer slope
factor approach is utilized. Based on the
data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that the use of the chronic
RfD is considered protective of potential
carcinogenicity for risk assessment
purposes.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for triflusulfuron-methyl. Tolerance
level residues and/or 100 PCT were
assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for triflusulfuron-methyl in drinking
water. These simulation models take
into account data on the physical,
chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of triflusulfuron-methyl.
Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at
https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/
water/index.htm.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI–
GROW) models, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of
triflusulfuron-methyl for chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments
are estimated to be 0.005 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and
0.50 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration of value 0.50 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).
Triflusulfuron-methyl is not registered
for any specific use patterns that would
result in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’ EPA has not
found triflusulfuron-methyl to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and triflusulfuronmethyl does not appear to produce a
toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that triflusulfuron-methyl 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.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
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 triflusulfuron-methyl toxicity
database is adequate to evaluate
potential increased susceptibility of
infants and children, and includes
developmental toxicity studies in rat
and rabbit and a 2-generation toxicity
study in rat. No developmental effects
were seen in the rat developmental
toxicity study. In the rabbit
developmental toxicity study, abortions
were observed at a dose that also caused
significant maternal toxicity, including
mortality, clinical signs, sharply
reduced food consumption and
decreased weight gain. In the rat
2-generation reproductive toxicity
study, decreased parental body weight/
weight gain and F1 pup weight during
lactation were observed at the mid and
high doses. No reproductive effects were
observed.
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:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
i. The toxicity database for
triflusulfuron-methyl is complete except
for immunotoxicity testing. Recent
changes to 40 CFR part 158 require
immunotoxicity testing (OPPTS
Guideline 870.7800) for pesticide
registration. However, the existing data
are sufficient for endpoint selection for
exposure/risk assessment scenarios, and
for evaluation of the requirements under
the FQPA. There was no evidence of
direct immunotoxicity in the available
studies. Hemolytic anemia, an effect
associated with exposure to some
sulfonylurea compounds, was observed
for triflusulfuron-methyl. Immunemediated hemolysis following binding
to red blood cells has been reported for
sulfonylurea drugs such as
chlorpromamide, although it is not clear
that the hemolytic anemia observed
with triflusulfuron-methyl is related to
the immune system. However, the
hemolytic effects seen in the studies
were of low concern because the effects
were sporadic and marginal (< 10%
below controls) and a large margin of
safety for the effects was provided by
the selection of the PODs. In the rat,
significant hematological alterations and
regenerative changes were observed at
doses ≥ 100-fold above the selected
PODs. Effects in the dog were seen at
doses ≥ 15-fold higher. The Agency does
not believe that an immunotoxicity
study will provide a POD lower than
that currently used for risk assessment;
therefore, an additional UF is not
needed to account for the lack of this
study.
ii. Although a statistically significant
increase in sciatic nerve myelin/axon
degeneration in high dose female rats
was observed in the triflusulfuronmethyl rat combined chronic toxicity/
carcinogenicity study, the incidence
was high in all dose groups, no
increases were seen in the interim
sacrifice groups or in shorter-term
studies, and the lesion is commonly
observed in older rats. Therefore, EPA
did not consider this finding to be
evidence of frank neurotoxicity, and
there is no need for a developmental
neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to
account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
triflusulfuron-methyl results in
increased susceptibility in in utero rats
or rabbits in the prenatal developmental
studies or in young rats in the
2-generation reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100 PCT and
tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground water and surface water
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22623
modeling used to assess exposure to
triflusulfuron-methyl in drinking water.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by triflusulfuron-methyl.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account acute
exposure estimates from dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, triflusulfuronmethyl 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 triflusulfuronmethyl from food and water will utilize
< 1% of the cPAD for children 3–5 years
old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. There are no
residential uses for triflusulfuronmethyl. Therefore, the chronic aggregate
risk estimates are equivalent to the
chronic dietary (food + water) risk
estimates.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk.
Short- and intermediate-term aggregate
exposure takes into account short- and
intermediate-term residential exposure
plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Short- and
intermediate-term adverse effects were
identified; however, triflusulfuronmethyl is not registered for any use
patterns that would result in short- or
intermediate-term residential exposure.
Short- and intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on short- and
intermediate-term residential exposure
plus chronic dietary exposure. Because
there is no short- or 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 short- and
intermediate-term risk), no further
assessment of short- and intermediate-
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
22624
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on
the chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating short- and intermediate-term
risk for triflusulfuron-methyl.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the discussion in
Unit III.C.iii., the chronic dietary risk
assessment is protective of any potential
cancer effects.
5. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to
triflusulfuron-methyl residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology,
a high-performance liquid
chromatography with ultraviolet
detection (HPLC–UV) method (Method
AMR 1930–91), 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; email address: residuemethods@epa.gov.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N.
Food and Agriculture Organization/
World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized
as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade
agreements to which the United States
is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance
that is different from a Codex MRL;
however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4)
requires that EPA explain the reasons
for departing from the Codex level.
There are currently no Codex MRLs
established for residues of
triflusulfuron-methyl in or on
commodities associated with this
petition. However, this action was a
work share agreement with Canada’s
Pesticide Management Regulatory
Agency (PMRA). While the tolerance for
beet, garden, roots at 0.01 ppm is
harmonized with PMRA, the tolerance
for beet, garden, tops at 0.02 ppm is not
harmonized with PMRA’s MRL of 0.01
ppm for that commodity. Based on the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
submitted residue data, garden beet tops
had residue levels equal to 0.01 ppm;
given the level of uncertainty for
quantification around the limit of
quantitation (0.01 ppm), EPA has
determined that a tolerance for beet,
garden, tops at 0.02 ppm is appropriate.
C. Response to Comments
EPA received one comment to the
Notice of Filing that made a general
objection to the presence of any
pesticide residues on crops and stated
that EPA should set no pesticide
tolerance greater than zero. The Agency
understands the commenter’s concerns
and recognizes that some individuals
believe that pesticides should be banned
completely. However, the existing legal
framework provided by section 408 of
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA) states that tolerances may
be set when persons seeking such
tolerances or exemptions have
demonstrated that the pesticide meets
the safety standard imposed by that
statute. This citizen’s comment appears
to be directed at the underlying statute
and not EPA’s implementation of it; the
citizen has made no contention that
EPA has acted in violation of the
statutory framework.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
EPA has revised the tolerance
expression to clarify: (1) That, as
provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3),
the tolerance covers metabolites and
degradates of triflusulfuron-methyl not
specifically mentioned; and (2) that
compliance with the specified tolerance
levels is to be determined by measuring
only the specific compounds mentioned
in the tolerance expression.
Additionally, EPA has revised the
chemical name from triflusulfuron
methyl to triflusulfuron-methyl in order
to reflect the preferred common name of
the chemical.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of triflusulfuron-methyl,
(methyl 2-[[[[[4-(dimethylamino)-6(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy)-1,3,5-triazin-2yl]amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-3methylbenzoate), in or on beet, garden,
roots at 0.01 ppm; and beet, garden, tops
at 0.02 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances
under section 408(d) of FFDCA in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 78 / Friday, April 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
(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.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–9849 Filed 4–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Transportation Security Administration
49 CFR Part 1503
[Docket No. TSA–2009–0014; Amendment
No. 1503–4]
RIN 1652–AA66
Reporting of Security Issues
Transportation Security
Administration, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) is adding
procedures by which any person will
receive a receipt for reporting a
problem, deficiency, or vulnerability
related to transportation security,
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
including the security of aviation,
amended as follows:
maritime, railroad, motor carrier
PART 180—[AMENDED]
vehicle, or pipeline transportation, or
any mode of public transportation, such
■ 1. The authority citation for part 180
as mass transit, in accordance with the
continues to read as follows:
‘‘Implementing Recommendations of the
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
9/11 Commission Act of 2007’’ (9/11
Act).
■ 2. Section 180.492 is amended by
DATES: Effective May 23, 2011.
revising the section heading and
paragraph (a) introductory text and
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
alphabetically adding the following
Traci Klemm, Office of Chief Counsel,
commodities to the table in paragraph
TSA–2, Transportation Security
(a) to read as follows:
Administration, 601 South 12th Street,
Arlington, VA 20598–6002; telephone
§ 180.492 Triflusulfuron-methyl; tolerances
(571) 227–3596; facsimile (571) 227–
for residues.
1380; e-mail traci.klemm@dhs.gov.
(a) General. Tolerances are
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
established for residues of
triflusulfuron-methyl, including its
Availability of Rulemaking Document
metabolites and degradates, in or on the
You can get an electronic copy using
commodities listed in the table below.
the Internet by—
Compliance with the tolerance levels
(1) Searching the electronic Federal
specified below is to be determined by
Docket Management System (FDMS)
measuring only triflusulfuron-methyl
Web page at https://www.regulations.gov;
(methyl 2-[[[[[4-(dimethylamino)-6(2) Accessing the Government
(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy)-1,3,5-triazin-2Printing Office’s Web page at https://
yl]amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-3www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/; or
methylbenzoate) in or on the following
(3) Visiting TSA’s Security
commodities:
Regulations Web page at https://
www.tsa.gov and accessing the link for
Parts per
‘‘Research Center’’ at the top of the page.
Commodity
million
In addition, copies are available by
writing or calling the person in the FOR
Beet, garden, roots ...................
0.01
Beet, garden, tops ....................
0.02 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Make sure to identify the docket number
of this rulemaking.
Dated: April 15, 2011.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Parts per
million
Commodity
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:51 Apr 21, 2011
Jkt 223001
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22625
Small Entity Inquiries
The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires TSA to comply with small
entity requests for information and
advice about compliance with statutes
and regulations within TSA’s
jurisdiction. Any small entity that has a
question regarding this document may
contact the person listed in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. Persons can
obtain further information regarding
SBREFA on the Small Business
Administration’s Web page at https://
www.sba.gov/advo/laws/law_lib.html.
Background
In the immediate aftermath of the
events on September 11, 2001, the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
established a task force to respond to the
large volume of incoming phone calls,
e-mails, and letters from the public. On
June 1, 2002, the Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) assumed
responsibility for this response to the
public, creating what is now known as
the TSA Contact Center (TCC). The TCC
is a widely-publicized open line for the
public to contact TSA. As such, it has
also provided a mechanism through
which TSA may receive information
about potential threats to transportation
security from both well-meaning
persons and those with harmful intent.
In December 2004, TCC availability
was expanded to 24 hours a day, 7 days
a week, 365 days per year, primarily to
ensure continuous review for threatrelated contacts. The current process for
public reporting of potential security
violations, threat information or
criminal activities, vulnerabilities and
intelligence was put in place after the
DHS Office of Inspector General
assessed the Agency’s actions to
improve the handling of threat and nonthreat communications following an
incident where a college student was
testing security.1
TSA also has ongoing initiatives
within the various transportation
modes, such as the General Aviation
Secure Program, that includes hotline
numbers to alert TSA of security
concerns.2 Information from these
reporting options, along with reports of
other security incidents and concerns
required by various TSA regulations, is
received and processed by the same
analytical components of TSA. Through
1 See unclassified summary at: https://
www.dhs.gov/xoig/assets/mgmtrpts/OIG_0551_Sep05.pdf.
2 See https://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/tsnm/
general_aviation/
programs_sp.shtm#general_aviation for more
information on the General Aviation Secure
Program.
E:\FR\FM\22APR1.SGM
22APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 78 (Friday, April 22, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22620-22625]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9849]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0102; FRL-8871-4]
Triflusulfuron-Methyl; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
triflusulfuron-methyl in or on beet, garden, roots and beet, garden,
tops. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective April 22, 2011. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before June 21, 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-2010-0102. 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: Laura Nollen, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-7390; e-mail address: nollen.laura@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-2010-0102 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 21, 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-2010-0102, 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
[[Page 22621]]
Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerances
In the Federal Register of March 19, 2010 (75 FR 13277) (FRL-8813-
2), 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
9E7669) by IR-4, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W., Princeton, NJ
08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.492 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide triflusulfuron-
methyl, 2-[[[[[4-(dimethylamino)-6-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy)-1,3,5-
triazin-2-yl]amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-3-methylbenzoate, in or on
beet, garden, roots at 0.01 parts per million (ppm); and beet, garden,
tops at 0.02 ppm. That notice referenced a summary of the petition
prepared on behalf of IR-4 by DuPont Crop Protection, the registrant,
which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. Comments
were received on the notice of filing. EPA's response to these comments
is discussed in Unit IV.C.
EPA has revised the tolerance expression for all established
commodities to be consistent with current Agency policy and has made a
technical correction to the chemical name. The reasons for these
changes are explained in Unit IV.D.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. * *
*''
Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure for triflusulfuron-methyl,
including exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this
action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with
triflusulfuron-methyl 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.
Triflusulfuron-methyl is of low acute toxicity when administered
orally, dermally, or via inhalation. It is not a dermal sensitizer or
irritant, and causes only minor transient irritation to the eye. The
primary target organs identified for triflusulfuron-methyl are the
liver, testes, and red blood cells. Hematological and histopathological
changes consistent with mild hemolytic anemia were observed in the rat
and the dog. Following subchronic and/or chronic dietary exposure,
increased incidence of testicular interstitial hyperplasia was observed
in the rat, and testicular atrophy and reduced size were observed in
the dog. Liver effects including histopathology and increased weight
were observed in the dog and mouse, but not in the rat.
No evidence of neurotoxicity was observed except for a
statistically significant increase in sciatic nerve myelin/axon
degeneration in female rats at the highest dose tested in the rat
combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study. However, the incidence
was high in all dose groups, no increases were seen in the interim
sacrifice groups or in shorter-term studies, and it is commonly
observed in older rats.
In the rat developmental toxicity study, no developmental effects
were noted, whereas maternal toxicity was observed (decreased body
weight gain, food consumption and feed efficiency). Abortions occurred
in the rabbit developmental toxicity study at a dose that also caused
significant maternal toxicity, including mortality, clinical signs,
sharply reduced food consumption and decreased weight gain. In the rat
reproductive toxicity study, decreased parental body weight/weight gain
and offspring weight during lactation were observed at the mid and high
doses. No reproductive effects were observed.
Triflusulfuron-methyl is classified as a possible human carcinogen
(Group C) under the 1986 Cancer Guidelines, based on an increased
incidence of benign testicular interstitial cell adenomas in male rats
in the combined chronic/carcinogenicity toxicity study and evidence of
clastogenicity in some in vitro genotoxicity studies. A special
mechanistic study that evaluated hormonal changes in male rats provided
insufficient information to establish a nonlinear mode of action for
the formation of these tumors. Additionally, although a statistically
significant incidence of hepatocellular adenomas was noted in a
carcinogenicity study in mice, it was within the historical control
range and not considered as part of the weight-of-evidence for
determination of cancer classification. Because the observed tumors
were benign and found in only one species, and only at significantly
higher dose levels than the dose selected for the point of departure,
the chronic reference dose (RfD) is considered protective of potential
carcinogenicity for risk assessment purposes.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by triflusulfuron-methyl as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document ``Triflusulfuron-methyl: Revised Human
Health Risk Assessment for Use in Garden Beet.'' at pages 34-38 in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0102.
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 RfD--and a safe margin of exposure
[[Page 22622]]
(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
triflusulfuron-methyl used for human risk assessment is shown in Table
1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Triflusulfuron-Methyl 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 Not required. An appropriate endpoint for this risk assessment was not
of age and General population, identified.
including infants and children).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations).. NOAEL= 2.44 mg/kg/day. Chronic RfD = 0.0244 Chronic oral toxicity/
UFA = 10x mg/kg/day. carcinogenicity in the
UFH = 10x cPAD = 0.0244 mg/kg/ rat LOAEL = 30.6 mg/kg/
FQPA SF = 1x day. day based on decreased
body weight/weight gain,
hematological changes
(primarily males) and
increased interstitial
cell hyperplasia (males).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).. Classification: Possible Human Carcinogen (Group C, 1986 Cancer
Guidelines), based on increased incidence of testicular interstitial cell
adenomas in rats. The RfD is considered adequately protective of these
effects.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor.
PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic).
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies).
UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to triflusulfuron-methyl, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing triflusulfuron-methyl
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.492. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
triflusulfuron-methyl in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies for triflusulfuron-methyl;
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 USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII). As
to residue levels in food, EPA utilized tolerance-level residues and
100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all commodities.
iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether quantitative cancer exposure
and risk assessments are appropriate for a food-use pesticide based on
the weight of the evidence from cancer studies and other relevant data.
Cancer risk is quantified using a linear or nonlinear approach. If
sufficient information on the carcinogenic mode of action is available,
a threshold or non-linear approach is used and a cancer RfD is
calculated based on an earlier noncancer key event. If carcinogenic
mode of action data are not available, or if the mode of action data
determines a mutagenic mode of action, a default linear cancer slope
factor approach is utilized. Based on the data summarized in Unit
III.A., EPA has concluded that the use of the chronic RfD is considered
protective of potential carcinogenicity for risk assessment purposes.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the dietary assessment
for triflusulfuron-methyl. Tolerance level residues and/or 100 PCT were
assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for triflusulfuron-methyl in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and
fate/transport characteristics of triflusulfuron-methyl. Further
information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
triflusulfuron-methyl for chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments
are estimated to be 0.005 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and
0.50 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 0.50 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). Triflusulfuron-methyl
is not registered for any specific use patterns that would result in
residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other
[[Page 22623]]
substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' EPA has not
found triflusulfuron-methyl to share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and triflusulfuron-methyl does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
triflusulfuron-methyl 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 triflusulfuron-methyl
toxicity database is adequate to evaluate potential increased
susceptibility of infants and children, and includes developmental
toxicity studies in rat and rabbit and a 2-generation toxicity study in
rat. No developmental effects were seen in the rat developmental
toxicity study. In the rabbit developmental toxicity study, abortions
were observed at a dose that also caused significant maternal toxicity,
including mortality, clinical signs, sharply reduced food consumption
and decreased weight gain. In the rat 2-generation reproductive
toxicity study, decreased parental body weight/weight gain and F1 pup
weight during lactation were observed at the mid and high doses. No
reproductive effects were observed.
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 triflusulfuron-methyl is complete
except for immunotoxicity testing. Recent changes to 40 CFR part 158
require immunotoxicity testing (OPPTS Guideline 870.7800) for pesticide
registration. However, the existing data are sufficient for endpoint
selection for exposure/risk assessment scenarios, and for evaluation of
the requirements under the FQPA. There was no evidence of direct
immunotoxicity in the available studies. Hemolytic anemia, an effect
associated with exposure to some sulfonylurea compounds, was observed
for triflusulfuron-methyl. Immune-mediated hemolysis following binding
to red blood cells has been reported for sulfonylurea drugs such as
chlorpromamide, although it is not clear that the hemolytic anemia
observed with triflusulfuron-methyl is related to the immune system.
However, the hemolytic effects seen in the studies were of low concern
because the effects were sporadic and marginal (< 10% below controls)
and a large margin of safety for the effects was provided by the
selection of the PODs. In the rat, significant hematological
alterations and regenerative changes were observed at doses >= 100-fold
above the selected PODs. Effects in the dog were seen at doses >= 15-
fold higher. The Agency does not believe that an immunotoxicity study
will provide a POD lower than that currently used for risk assessment;
therefore, an additional UF is not needed to account for the lack of
this study.
ii. Although a statistically significant increase in sciatic nerve
myelin/axon degeneration in high dose female rats was observed in the
triflusulfuron-methyl rat combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity
study, the incidence was high in all dose groups, no increases were
seen in the interim sacrifice groups or in shorter-term studies, and
the lesion is commonly observed in older rats. Therefore, EPA did not
consider this finding to be evidence of frank neurotoxicity, and there
is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to
account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that triflusulfuron-methyl results in
increased susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground water and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to triflusulfuron-methyl in drinking water.
These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed
by triflusulfuron-methyl.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
triflusulfuron-methyl 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
triflusulfuron-methyl from food and water will utilize < 1% of the cPAD
for children 3-5 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for triflusulfuron-methyl.
Therefore, the chronic aggregate risk estimates are equivalent to the
chronic dietary (food + water) risk estimates.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. Short- and intermediate-term
aggregate exposure takes into account short- and intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background exposure level). Short- and
intermediate-term adverse effects were identified; however,
triflusulfuron-methyl is not registered for any use patterns that would
result in short- or intermediate-term residential exposure. Short- and
intermediate-term risk is assessed based on short- and intermediate-
term residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure. Because there
is no short- or 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 short- and intermediate-term risk), no further assessment of
short- and intermediate-
[[Page 22624]]
term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk
assessment for evaluating short- and intermediate-term risk for
triflusulfuron-methyl.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the
discussion in Unit III.C.iii., the chronic dietary risk assessment is
protective of any potential cancer effects.
5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to triflusulfuron-methyl residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology, a high-performance liquid
chromatography with ultraviolet detection (HPLC-UV) method (Method AMR
1930-91), 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.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. Food and
Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards
program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
There are currently no Codex MRLs established for residues of
triflusulfuron-methyl in or on commodities associated with this
petition. However, this action was a work share agreement with Canada's
Pesticide Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA). While the tolerance for
beet, garden, roots at 0.01 ppm is harmonized with PMRA, the tolerance
for beet, garden, tops at 0.02 ppm is not harmonized with PMRA's MRL of
0.01 ppm for that commodity. Based on the submitted residue data,
garden beet tops had residue levels equal to 0.01 ppm; given the level
of uncertainty for quantification around the limit of quantitation
(0.01 ppm), EPA has determined that a tolerance for beet, garden, tops
at 0.02 ppm is appropriate.
C. Response to Comments
EPA received one comment to the Notice of Filing that made a
general objection to the presence of any pesticide residues on crops
and stated that EPA should set no pesticide tolerance greater than
zero. The Agency understands the commenter's concerns and recognizes
that some individuals believe that pesticides should be banned
completely. However, the existing legal framework provided by section
408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) states that
tolerances may be set when persons seeking such tolerances or
exemptions have demonstrated that the pesticide meets the safety
standard imposed by that statute. This citizen's comment appears to be
directed at the underlying statute and not EPA's implementation of it;
the citizen has made no contention that EPA has acted in violation of
the statutory framework.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
EPA has revised the tolerance expression to clarify: (1) That, as
provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), the tolerance covers metabolites
and degradates of triflusulfuron-methyl not specifically mentioned; and
(2) that compliance with the specified tolerance levels is to be
determined by measuring only the specific compounds mentioned in the
tolerance expression. Additionally, EPA has revised the chemical name
from triflusulfuron methyl to triflusulfuron-methyl in order to reflect
the preferred common name of the chemical.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
triflusulfuron-methyl, (methyl 2-[[[[[4-(dimethylamino)-6-(2,2,2-
trifluoroethoxy)-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-3-
methylbenzoate), in or on beet, garden, roots at 0.01 ppm; and beet,
garden, tops at 0.02 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
Tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or Tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995
[[Page 22625]]
(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: April 15, 2011.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
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 180.492 is amended by revising the section heading and
paragraph (a) introductory text and alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.492 Triflusulfuron-methyl; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of
triflusulfuron-methyl, including its metabolites and degradates, in or
on the commodities listed in the table below. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only
triflusulfuron-methyl (methyl 2-[[[[[4-(dimethylamino)-6-(2,2,2-
trifluoroethoxy)-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-3-
methylbenzoate) in or on the following commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beet, garden, roots........................................ 0.01
Beet, garden, tops......................................... 0.02
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-9849 Filed 4-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P