Tepraloxydim; Pesticide Tolerances, 82146-82152 [2011-33477]
Download as PDF
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
82146
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Do not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are not subject to the requirements
of Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Do not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as added by
the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,
generally provides that before a rule
may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a
rule report, which includes a copy of
the rule, to each House of the Congress
and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. 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 the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:50 Dec 29, 2011
Jkt 226001
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. section 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by February 28,
2012. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of
this final rule does not affect the finality
of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time
within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule
or action. This action may not be
challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
172(c)(9) contingency measures for
failure to attain and sections 182(d)(3)
and 185 major stationary source fee
programs.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements,
Volatile organic compounds.
SUMMARY:
Dated: December 16, 2011.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F—California
2. Section 52.282 is amended by
adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:
■
§ 52.282
Ozone.
Control strategy and regulations:
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Determinations that Certain Areas
Did Not Attain the 1-Hour Ozone
NAAQS. EPA has determined that the
Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin Area
and the San Joaquin Valley Area
extreme 1-hour ozone nonattainment
areas did not attain the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date of November 15, 2010 and that the
Southeast Desert Modified Air Quality
Maintenance Area severe-17 1-hour
ozone nonattainment area did not attain
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date of November
15, 2007. These determinations bear on
the areas’ obligations with respect to the
one-hour ozone standard antibacksliding requirements whose
implementation is triggered by a
determination of failure to attain by the
applicable attainment date: section
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[FR Doc. 2011–33475 Filed 12–29–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0865; FRL–9330–2]
Tepraloxydim; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of tepraloxydim
in or on the imported commodities ‘‘Pea
and bean, dried shelled, except soybean,
subgroup 6C’’ and ‘‘Sunflower subgroup
20B’’. BASF Corporation requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). This
regulation also removes established
tolerances for residues of tepraloxydim
on ‘‘Lentil, seed’’ and ‘‘Pea, dry, seed,’’
as residues on these commodities will
be covered by the new tolerance on the
pea and bean subgroup (6C).
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 30, 2011. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 28, 2012, 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–2010–0865. 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.
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Stanton, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–5218; email address:
stanton.susan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to those engaged in the
following activities:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/
text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/
Title40/40tab_02.tpl. To access the
harmonized test guidelines referenced
in this document electronically, please
go https://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select
‘‘Test Methods and Guidelines.’’
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
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–
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:50 Dec 29, 2011
Jkt 226001
OPP–2010–0865 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before February 28, 2012. 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–2010–0865, 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 December
15, 2010 (75 FR 78240) (FRL–8853–1),
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 0E7788) by BASF
Corporation, P.O. Box 13528, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.573 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the herbicide tepraloxydim,
2-[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-2-propen-1yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3-hydroxy-5(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-2cyclohexen-1-one and its metabolites
convertible to GP (3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid) and OH–GP
(3-hydroxy-3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), calculated as
tepraloxydim, in or on Pea and bean,
dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup
6C and Sunflower subgroup 20B at 0.10
parts per million (ppm) and 0.25 ppm,
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
82147
respectively. That notice referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by
BASF Corporation, the registrant, which
is available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has
reduced the proposed tolerance for
Sunflower subgroup 20B from 0.25 ppm
to 0.20 ppm. The reason for this change
is 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 tepraloxydim
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with tepraloxydim 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.
Tepraloxydim has low acute toxicity
via the oral, dermal, and inhalation
routes of exposure. It produces minimal
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
82148
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
eye irritation, is a slight dermal irritant,
and is not a dermal sensitizer.
In subchronic and chronic toxicity
studies, the main target organs for
tepraloxydim toxicity were the liver, the
spleen/hematopoietic system and
reproductive system. Liver findings
were reported in all subchronic and
chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity feeding
studies and included increased
incidences of hepatocellular foci,
abnormal liver function parameters,
increased relative liver weight,
hepatocyte hypertrophy, and increased
hepatocellular neoplasms in the mouse
and rat carcinogenicity studies.
Tepraloxydim also affected the
hematopoietic system. In dogs,
hemolytic anemia was demonstrated by
depressed hematocrit, hemoglobin, and
red blood cells (RBCs). These changes
were accompanied by compensatory
responses, including splenic
hematopoiesis, femoral and sternal bone
marrow hyperplasia, increased
erythroid precursors and hemosiderinladen macrophages, and splenic
hemosiderosis. The reproductive system
was affected by tepraloxydim at
relatively high doses (in excess of
LOAELs (lowest observed adverse effect
levels) established in repeat-dose
mouse, rat and dog studies).
Reproductive effects included
morphological microscopic changes
indicative of reduced secretory activity
in the seminal vesicles and preputial
glands in male mice; increased uterine
sclerosis, decreased corpora lutea, and
decreased follicles in female mice;
increased incidences of focal
calcification of the testes in the high
dose group in the rat carcinogenicity
feeding study; and effects on male sex
organs at high doses in dogs.
In the rat developmental toxicity
study, fetal effects (reduced fetal body
weights, delayed ossification and the
occurrence of hydroureter) were seen at
a dose threefold lower than the dose
resulting in maternal toxicity (reduced
body weight and body weight gain).
Additional developmental anomalies or
malformations (dilatation of both heart
ventricles and filiform tails that were
observed externally and corresponded
to absent caudal and sacral vertebrae)
were observed at the maternal LOAEL in
the study. The results indicate potential
increased quantitative and qualitative
susceptibility of fetuses to tepraloxydim
exposure. In contrast, no developmental
effects were seen in the rabbit
developmental toxicity study up to the
highest tested dose, the LOAEL for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:50 Dec 29, 2011
Jkt 226001
maternal toxicity (reduced body weight
and food consumption). In the multigeneration rat reproduction study, there
were no effects on any of the measured
reproductive parameters up to and
including the highest tested dose and no
evidence of quantitative or qualitative
susceptibility of the offspring.
In both the acute and subchronic rat
neurotoxicity studies, there were mild
changes in motor activity and grip
strength indices. On day 0 of the acute
oral neurotoxicity study in rats, motor
activity was decreased in all treated
female groups, while forelimb grip
strength was slightly increased in all
treated females. In the rat subchronic
neurotoxicity study, motor activity was
increased in the high dose females at
day 50 and in both sexes on day 85 at
the highest dose tested. None of the
studies, including both neurotoxicity
studies, reported treatment-related
effects on brain weight or gross/
microscopic lesions in the tissues of the
nervous system.
In cancer studies conducted in rats
and mice, there was weak and/or
conflicting evidence of carcinogenicity.
In rats, there was some evidence of
carcinogenicity in the females based on
an increased incidence of liver tumors
at the high dose only in the
carcinogenicity phase of the study, but
this finding was not supported by the
results of the chronic phase in the same
strain and sex of rats. In mice, liver
tumors were seen in females at an
excessively toxic dose. EPA’s concern
for carcinogenicity is low, and the
Agency has determined that the chronic
population-adjusted dose (cPAD) of 0.05
milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day)
will adequately account for all chronic
effects, including carcinogenicity, likely
to result from exposure to tepraloxydim.
This determination is based on the
following considerations:
• The liver tumors in female rats were
seen only at the high dose (i.e., lack of
dose response);
• The incidences of these tumors
were within the ranges for the historical
controls;
• The rat liver tumors observed in
one study were not seen in a parallel
study conducted at the same dose and
duration (i.e., tumorogenic potential not
replicated);
• In mice, liver tumors were seen
only at excessive doses (i.e., greater than
the Limit Dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day)
which may have resulted in indirect
effects that may not occur at lower
doses;
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• The liver tumors did not result in
reduced latency in either species;
• There is no concern for
mutagenicity/genotoxicity; and
• The NOAEL (no observed adverse
effect level) of 5 mg/kg/day used for
deriving the chronic reference dose
(cRfD) is approximately 55-fold lower
than the lowest dose (272 mg/kg/day)
that induced liver tumors in rats.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by tepraloxydim as well
as the NOAEL and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level LOAEL from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in the document
‘‘Amended: Tepraloxydim: Human
Health Risk Assessment for New
Tolerances on Imported Dry Bean and
Dry Pea Subgroup 6C and Sunflower
Subgroup 20B’’ at page 31 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0865.
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
point of departure (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 PAD or a 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 tepraloxydim used for
human risk assessment is shown in the
following Table .
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
82149
TABLE—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR TEPRALOXYDIM FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Exposure/scenario
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for risk
asssessment
Study and toxicological effects
Acute dietary (General population including infants
and children).
LOAEL = 500 (mg/kg/day)
UFA = 10×
UFH = 10×
FQPA SF retained as UFL
= 10×.
NOAEL = 40 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10×
UFH = 10×
FQPA SF = 1×
NOAEL = 5 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10×
UFH = 10×
FQPA SF = 1×
Acute RfD = 0.5 mg/kg/day
aPAD = 0.5 mg/kg/day
Acute neurotoxicity screening battery LOAEL = 500
mg/kg/day based on decreased motor activity in females. (The NOAEL is not identified.)
Chronic RfD = 0.4 mg/kg/
day.
cPAD = 0.4 mg/kg/day
Rat developmental toxicity LOAEL = 120 mg/kg/day
based on findings of reduced ossification indicative
of delayed maturation, and the occurrence of
hydroureter.
Rat carcinogenicity study LOAEL = 30 mg/kg/day
based on male liver microscopic lesions
(eosinophilic foci).
Acute dietary ........................
(Females 13–49 years of
age).
Chronic dietary (All populations).
Cancer .................................
(Oral, dermal, inhalation)
Chronic RfD = 0.05 mg/kg/
day.
cPAD = 0.05 mg/kg/day
Weak and/or conflicting evidence of carcinogenicity in the rat and mouse; the chronic population-adjusted dose of
0.05 mg/kg/day will adequately account for all chronic effects, including 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. FQPA SF = Food
Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. LOC = level of concern.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to tepraloxydim, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing tepraloxydim tolerances in 40
CFR 180.573. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from tepraloxydim in food as
follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide,
if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1-day or single
exposure. Such effects were identified
for tepraloxydim. As shown in the Table
above, EPA identified different points of
departure for assessing acute dietary
exposure for the general population
(including infants and children) and
women of childbearing age (13 to 49).
In estimating acute dietary exposure,
EPA used food consumption
information from the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1994–1996 and 1998 Nationwide
Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels
in food, EPA assumed that residues are
present in all commodities at the
tolerance level and that 100% of
commodities are treated with
tepraloxydim.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998
CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA
assumed that residues are present in all
commodities at the tolerance level and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:50 Dec 29, 2011
Jkt 226001
that 100% of commodities are treated
with tepraloxydim.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that tepraloxydim 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 screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for tepraloxydim in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
tepraloxydim. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir
Screening Tool (FIRST) and Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI–
GROW) models, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of
tepraloxydim for acute exposures are
estimated to be 1.4 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 0.002 ppb
for ground water. EDWCs for chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments
are estimated to be 0.7 ppb for surface
water and 0.002 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
acute dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value of 1.4 ppb was used
to assess the contribution to drinking
water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 0.7 ppb was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
Tepraloxydim is not registered for any
specific use patterns that would result
in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’ EPA has not
found tepraloxydim to share a common
mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and tepraloxydim does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has assumed that
tepraloxydim 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 (10×) margin of
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
82150
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
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 10×, 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.
As discussed in Unit III.A, there was
evidence of increased qualitative and
quantitative susceptibility of fetuses in
the rat developmental toxicity study.
There was no evidence of increased
susceptibility seen in the rabbit
developmental toxicity study or multigeneration rat reproduction study. The
degree of concern is low for the
increased susceptibility seen in the
developmental study in rats (prenatal
exposure), since a clear NOAEL/LOAEL
was established for developmental
toxicity and the endpoints of concern
are used to assess exposure for the most
sensitive population of concern (i.e.,
Females 13to 49). There is no residual
uncertainty for prenatal and/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 1× for all exposure
scenarios, except acute dietary exposure
of the general population.
A 10× FQPA Safety Factor in the form
of a UFL is retained for assessing acute
dietary risk for the general population,
including infants and children, to
account for the uncertainty resulting
from using a LOAEL, rather than a
NOAEL, as the POD (i.e., a NOAEL was
not identified in the critical study). The
critical effect (decreased motor activity
in females) observed at the LOAEL of
500 mg/kg/day in the acute
neurotoxicity study was neither severe
nor irreversible; and the doseresponsive decrease in motor activity
was observed in females on Day 0 in the
absence of any other treatment-related
clinical signs (including functional
observation battery) or
neurohistopathological effects. The
dose-response relationship of
tepraloxydim indicates that an
uncertainty factor of 10× is sufficiently
protective against the critical effect and
any other adverse effects at the aRfD.
The decision to reduce the FQPA SF
to 1× for all other exposure scenarios is
based on the following findings:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:50 Dec 29, 2011
Jkt 226001
i. The toxicity database is complete
except for immunotoxicity testing
(OPPTS Guideline 870.7800). Recent
changes to 40 CFR part 158 make this
testing required for pesticide
registration. In the absence of specific
immunotoxicity studies, EPA has
evaluated the available tepraloxydim
toxicity database to determine whether
an additional database uncertainty
factor is needed to account for potential
immunotoxicity. No evidence of
immunotoxicity was found. Treatmentrelated effects seen in the spleen
(splenic hematopoiesis) and bone
marrow (hyperplasia) are compensatory
responses to tepraloxydim-induced
hemolytic anemia.
Considering the lack of evidence of
immunotoxicity in the database for
tepraloxydim, EPA does not believe that
conducting an immunotoxicity study
will result in a NOAEL less than that (5
mg/kg/day) used to derive the current
cRfD. Consequently, the EPA believes
the existing data are sufficient for
endpoint selection for exposure/risk
assessment purposes and for evaluation
of the requirements under the FQPA,
and an additional database uncertainty
factor is unnecessary.
ii. In both the acute and subchronic
rat neurotoxicity studies, there were
mild changes in motor activity and grip
strength indices. However, EPA has
concluded that there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity (DNT)
study or additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity, based on the following
considerations:
• Neurotoxic effects were seen at high
doses of 500 mg/kg (1⁄4 of the limit
dose), 1,000 mg/kg, and 2,000 mg/kg
following bolus (gavage) dosing in the
acute neurotoxicity study and at 428
mg/kg/day in males and 513 mg/kg/day
in females following dietary
administration in the subchronic
neurotoxicity study.
• In the two-generation reproduction
study, no clinical signs indicative of
neurotoxicity were seen in the parental
animals or offspring; nor was there
evidence for increased susceptibility of
offspring.
• Because a DNT study would
necessarily be conducted at high doses
in order to elicit neurotoxicity, it would
not yield a POD lower than those
currently used for acute (40 mg/kg
[aPAD = 0.40 mg/kg] and 500 mg/kg
[cPAD = 0.5 mg/kg]) and chronic (5 mg/
kg/day) risk assessments.
iii. Although there was evidence of
increased qualitative and quantitative
susceptibility of fetuses in the rat
developmental toxicity study, the
concern for the increased susceptibility
is low, and EPA did not identify any
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
residual uncertainties after establishing
toxicity endpoints and traditional UFs
to be used in the risk assessment of
tepraloxydim.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100% crop
treated (CT) and tolerance-level
residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground
and surface water modeling used to
assess exposure to tepraloxydim in
drinking water. These assessments will
not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by tepraloxydim.
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. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to
tepraloxydim will occupy 2.2% of the
aPAD for children, 1 to 2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure. The acute dietary exposure
from food and water to tepraloxydim
will occupy 1.0% or less of the aPAD for
all other population subgroups,
including females 13 to 49 years old.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to tepraloxydim
from food and water will utilize 9.6% of
the cPAD for children, 1 to 2 years old,
the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. There are no
residential uses for tepraloxydim.
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). A short-term adverse
effect was identified; however,
tepraloxydim is not registered for any
use patterns that would result in shortterm residential exposure. Short-term
risk is assessed based on short-term
residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no
short-term residential exposure and
chronic dietary exposure has already
been assessed under the appropriately
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
protective cPAD (which is at least as
protective as the POD used to assess
short-term risk), no further assessment
of short-term risk is necessary, and EPA
relies on the chronic dietary risk
assessment for evaluating short-term
risk for tepraloxydim.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level). An
intermediate-term adverse effect was
identified; however, tepraloxydim is not
registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on intermediateterm residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure
and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for
tepraloxydim.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the results of two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies
and the explanation given in Unit III.A,
tepraloxydim 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
tepraloxydim residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(gas chromatography/mass spectrometry
(GC/MS) BASF Analytical Method
D9701/1) 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.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:50 Dec 29, 2011
Jkt 226001
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N.
Food and Agriculture Organization/
World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized
as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade
agreements to which the United States
is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance
that is different from a Codex MRL;
however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4)
requires that EPA explain the reasons
for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established a MRL
for tepraloxydim.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
EPA has reduced the proposed
tolerance for Sunflower subgroup 20B
from 0.25 ppm to 0.20 ppm to
harmonize with the established MRL in
Canada. Since the highest average field
trial residue and maximum field trial
residue for sunflower seed were 0.14
ppm and 0.18 ppm, respectively, EPA
has determined that the Canadian level
is adequate to cover expected residues
on commodities in subgroup 20B.
EPA is also revising the introductory
text of § 180.573(a)(1), (a)(2) and (c),
which contain the tolerance expression
for the existing and new tolerances, to
clarify the chemical moieties that are
covered by the tolerances and specify
how compliance with the tolerances is
to be determined. Tolerances for plant
commodities are currently expressed in
terms of the combined residues
tepraloxydim, 2-[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-2propen-1-yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3hydroxy-5-(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-2cyclohexen-1-one, and its metabolites
convertible to GP (3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid) and OH–GP
(3-hydroxy-3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), calculated as
tepraloxydim. Livestock tolerances are
currently expressed in terms of the
combined residues of tepraloxydim and
its metabolites convertible to GP, OH–
GP, and GL (3-(2-oyotetrahydropyran-4yl)-1,5-dioic acid), calculated as
tepraloxydim. The tolerance expression
for plants is being revised to make clear
that the tolerances cover residues of
tepraloxydim, including its metabolites
and degradates, but that compliance
with the tolerances is to be determined
by measuring only the combined
residues of tepraloxydim and its
metabolites convertible to GP and OH–
GP, calculated as tepraloxydim.
Similarly, the tolerance expression for
livestock commodities is being revised
to clarify that the tolerances cover
residues of tepraloxydim, including its
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
82151
metabolites and degradates, but that
compliance with the tolerance levels
will be determined by measuring only
the combined residues of tepraloxydim
and its metabolites convertible to GP,
OH–GP, and GL, calculated as
tepraloxydim. EPA has determined that
it is reasonable to make these changes
final without prior proposal and
opportunity for comment, because
public comment is not necessary, in that
the changes have no substantive effect
on the tolerances, but rather are merely
intended to clarify the existing tolerance
expressions.
Finally, EPA is removing established
tolerances for residues of tepraloxydim
on ‘‘Lentil, seed’’ and ‘‘Pea, dry, seed’’
because residues on these commodities
are covered by the new tolerances for
residues of tepraloxydim on the pea and
bean subgroup 6C.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, the established tolerances
for residues of tepraloxydim on ‘‘Lentil,
seed’’ and ‘‘Pea, dry, seed’’ are removed,
and new tolerances are established for
residues of tepraloxydim, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on
‘‘Pea and bean, dried shelled, except
soybean, subgroup 6C’’ and ‘‘Sunflower
subgroup 20B’’ as set forth in the
regulatory text.
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
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
82152
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 251 / Friday, December 30, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as
the tolerances 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).
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:50 Dec 29, 2011
Jkt 226001
Dated: December 14, 2011.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Amend § 180.573 as follows:
a. Revise the introductory text in
paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and (c);
■ b. Remove the commodities ‘‘Lentil,
seed’’ and ‘‘Pea, dry, seed’’ from the
table in paragraph (a)(1);
■ c. Add alphabetically the
commodities ‘‘Pea and bean, dried
shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C’’
and ‘‘Sunflower subgroup 20B’’ and add
footnote 1 to the table in paragraph
(a)(1).
The revised and added text read as
follows:
■
■
§ 180.573 Tepraloxydim; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are
established for residues of
tepraloxydim, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by
measuring only the combined residues
of tepraloxydim, (2-[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-2propen-1-yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3hydroxy-5-(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-2cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites
convertible to GP (3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid) and OH–GP
(3-hydroxy-3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), calculated as
tepraloxydim, in or on the commodities.
Parts per
million
Commodity
specified below is to be determined by
measuring only the combined residues
of tepraloxydim (2-[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-2propen-1-yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3hydroxy-5-(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-2cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites
convertible to GP (3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), OH–GP (3hydroxy-3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), and GL (3-(2oxotetrahydropyran-4-yl)-1,5-dioic
acid), calculated as tepraloxydim, in or
on the commodities.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. A tolerance with regional
registration, as defined in § 180.1(l), is
established for residues of
tepraloxydim, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by
measuring only the combined residues
of tepraloxydim (2-[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-2propen-1-yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3hydroxy-5-(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-2cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites
convertible to GP (3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid) and OH–GP
(3-hydroxy-3-(tetrahydropyran-4yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), calculated as
tepraloxydim, in or on the commodities.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–33477 Filed 12–29–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0283; FRL–9330–1]
Cyhalofop-butyl; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation amends
tolerances for residues of cyhalofopbutyl in or on rice, grain and rice, wild,
Pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C 1 ....
0.10 grain. Dow AgroSciences, LLC requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
*
*
*
*
DATES: This regulation is effective
Sunflower subgroup 20B 1 ............
0.20 December 30, 2011. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
*
*
*
*
on or before February 28, 2012, and
must be filed in accordance with the
1 There are no U.S. registrations for cominstructions provided in 40 CFR part
modities in this subgroup.
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
(2) Tolerances are established for
residues of tepraloxydim, including its
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
metabolites and degradates, in or on the docket for this action under docket
commodities in the table below.
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
Compliance with the tolerance levels
OPP–2011–0283. All documents in the
*
PO 00000
*
Frm 00078
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
*
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\30DER1.SGM
30DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 251 (Friday, December 30, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 82146-82152]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-33477]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0865; FRL-9330-2]
Tepraloxydim; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
tepraloxydim in or on the imported commodities ``Pea and bean, dried
shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C'' and ``Sunflower subgroup 20B''.
BASF Corporation requested these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). This regulation also removes
established tolerances for residues of tepraloxydim on ``Lentil, seed''
and ``Pea, dry, seed,'' as residues on these commodities will be
covered by the new tolerance on the pea and bean subgroup (6C).
DATES: This regulation is effective December 30, 2011. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 28, 2012,
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-2010-0865. 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.
[[Page 82147]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Stanton, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-5218; email address: stanton.susan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those
engaged in the following activities:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to
provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by
this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in
determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl. To access the
harmonized test guidelines referenced in this document electronically,
please go https://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ``Test Methods and
Guidelines.''
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0865 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
February 28, 2012. 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-2010-0865, 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 December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78240) (FRL-
8853-1), 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
0E7788) by BASF Corporation, P.O. Box 13528, Research Triangle Park, NC
27709. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.573 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide tepraloxydim, 2-
[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-2-propen-1-yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3-hydroxy-5-
(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-2-cyclohexen-1-one and its metabolites
convertible to GP (3-(tetrahydropyran-4-yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid) and
OH-GP (3-hydroxy-3-(tetrahydropyran-4-yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid),
calculated as tepraloxydim, in or on Pea and bean, dried shelled,
except soybean, subgroup 6C and Sunflower subgroup 20B at 0.10 parts
per million (ppm) and 0.25 ppm, respectively. That notice referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by BASF Corporation, the registrant,
which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There
were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
reduced the proposed tolerance for Sunflower subgroup 20B from 0.25 ppm
to 0.20 ppm. The reason for this change is 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 tepraloxydim including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with tepraloxydim
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.
Tepraloxydim has low acute toxicity via the oral, dermal, and
inhalation routes of exposure. It produces minimal
[[Page 82148]]
eye irritation, is a slight dermal irritant, and is not a dermal
sensitizer.
In subchronic and chronic toxicity studies, the main target organs
for tepraloxydim toxicity were the liver, the spleen/hematopoietic
system and reproductive system. Liver findings were reported in all
subchronic and chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity feeding studies and
included increased incidences of hepatocellular foci, abnormal liver
function parameters, increased relative liver weight, hepatocyte
hypertrophy, and increased hepatocellular neoplasms in the mouse and
rat carcinogenicity studies. Tepraloxydim also affected the
hematopoietic system. In dogs, hemolytic anemia was demonstrated by
depressed hematocrit, hemoglobin, and red blood cells (RBCs). These
changes were accompanied by compensatory responses, including splenic
hematopoiesis, femoral and sternal bone marrow hyperplasia, increased
erythroid precursors and hemosiderin-laden macrophages, and splenic
hemosiderosis. The reproductive system was affected by tepraloxydim at
relatively high doses (in excess of LOAELs (lowest observed adverse
effect levels) established in repeat-dose mouse, rat and dog studies).
Reproductive effects included morphological microscopic changes
indicative of reduced secretory activity in the seminal vesicles and
preputial glands in male mice; increased uterine sclerosis, decreased
corpora lutea, and decreased follicles in female mice; increased
incidences of focal calcification of the testes in the high dose group
in the rat carcinogenicity feeding study; and effects on male sex
organs at high doses in dogs.
In the rat developmental toxicity study, fetal effects (reduced
fetal body weights, delayed ossification and the occurrence of
hydroureter) were seen at a dose threefold lower than the dose
resulting in maternal toxicity (reduced body weight and body weight
gain). Additional developmental anomalies or malformations (dilatation
of both heart ventricles and filiform tails that were observed
externally and corresponded to absent caudal and sacral vertebrae) were
observed at the maternal LOAEL in the study. The results indicate
potential increased quantitative and qualitative susceptibility of
fetuses to tepraloxydim exposure. In contrast, no developmental effects
were seen in the rabbit developmental toxicity study up to the highest
tested dose, the LOAEL for maternal toxicity (reduced body weight and
food consumption). In the multi-generation rat reproduction study,
there were no effects on any of the measured reproductive parameters up
to and including the highest tested dose and no evidence of
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility of the offspring.
In both the acute and subchronic rat neurotoxicity studies, there
were mild changes in motor activity and grip strength indices. On day 0
of the acute oral neurotoxicity study in rats, motor activity was
decreased in all treated female groups, while forelimb grip strength
was slightly increased in all treated females. In the rat subchronic
neurotoxicity study, motor activity was increased in the high dose
females at day 50 and in both sexes on day 85 at the highest dose
tested. None of the studies, including both neurotoxicity studies,
reported treatment-related effects on brain weight or gross/microscopic
lesions in the tissues of the nervous system.
In cancer studies conducted in rats and mice, there was weak and/or
conflicting evidence of carcinogenicity. In rats, there was some
evidence of carcinogenicity in the females based on an increased
incidence of liver tumors at the high dose only in the carcinogenicity
phase of the study, but this finding was not supported by the results
of the chronic phase in the same strain and sex of rats. In mice, liver
tumors were seen in females at an excessively toxic dose. EPA's concern
for carcinogenicity is low, and the Agency has determined that the
chronic population-adjusted dose (cPAD) of 0.05 milligrams/kilogram/day
(mg/kg/day) will adequately account for all chronic effects, including
carcinogenicity, likely to result from exposure to tepraloxydim. This
determination is based on the following considerations:
The liver tumors in female rats were seen only at the high
dose (i.e., lack of dose response);
The incidences of these tumors were within the ranges for
the historical controls;
The rat liver tumors observed in one study were not seen
in a parallel study conducted at the same dose and duration (i.e.,
tumorogenic potential not replicated);
In mice, liver tumors were seen only at excessive doses
(i.e., greater than the Limit Dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day) which may have
resulted in indirect effects that may not occur at lower doses;
The liver tumors did not result in reduced latency in
either species;
There is no concern for mutagenicity/genotoxicity; and
The NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level) of 5 mg/kg/
day used for deriving the chronic reference dose (cRfD) is
approximately 55-fold lower than the lowest dose (272 mg/kg/day) that
induced liver tumors in rats.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by tepraloxydim as well as the NOAEL and the
lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level LOAEL from the toxicity studies
can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in the document ``Amended:
Tepraloxydim: Human Health Risk Assessment for New Tolerances on
Imported Dry Bean and Dry Pea Subgroup 6C and Sunflower Subgroup 20B''
at page 31 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0865.
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 point of departure (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 PAD or a 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
tepraloxydim used for human risk assessment is shown in the following
Table .
[[Page 82149]]
Table--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Tepraloxydim for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure and
Exposure/scenario uncertainty/safety RfD, PAD, LOC for risk Study and toxicological
factors asssessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (General population LOAEL = 500 (mg/kg/ Acute RfD = 0.5 mg/kg/ Acute neurotoxicity
including infants and children). day). day. screening battery LOAEL =
UFA = 10x............. aPAD = 0.5 mg/kg/day.. 500 mg/kg/day based on
UFH = 10x............. decreased motor activity
FQPA SF retained as in females. (The NOAEL is
UFL = 10x. not identified.)
Acute dietary...................... NOAEL = 40 mg/kg/day Chronic RfD = 0.4 mg/ Rat developmental toxicity
(Females 13-49 years of age)....... UFA = 10x............. kg/day. LOAEL = 120 mg/kg/day
UFH = 10x............. cPAD = 0.4 mg/kg/day.. based on findings of
FQPA SF = 1x.......... reduced ossification
indicative of delayed
maturation, and the
occurrence of hydroureter.
Chronic dietary (All populations).. NOAEL = 5 mg/kg/day Chronic RfD = 0.05 mg/ Rat carcinogenicity study
UFA = 10x............. kg/day. LOAEL = 30 mg/kg/day based
UFH = 10x............. cPAD = 0.05 mg/kg/day. on male liver microscopic
FQPA SF = 1x.......... lesions (eosinophilic
foci).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer............................. Weak and/or conflicting evidence of carcinogenicity in the rat and mouse;
(Oral, dermal, inhalation)......... the chronic population-adjusted dose of 0.05 mg/kg/day will adequately
account for all chronic effects, including 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. FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population
adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. LOC = level of concern.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to tepraloxydim, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing tepraloxydim tolerances in 40
CFR 180.573. EPA assessed dietary exposures from tepraloxydim in food
as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified
for tepraloxydim. As shown in the Table above, EPA identified different
points of departure for assessing acute dietary exposure for the
general population (including infants and children) and women of
childbearing age (13 to 49).
In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1994-1996 and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed that
residues are present in all commodities at the tolerance level and that
100% of commodities are treated with tepraloxydim.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed that residues
are present in all commodities at the tolerance level and that 100% of
commodities are treated with tepraloxydim.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that tepraloxydim 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 screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for tepraloxydim in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of tepraloxydim. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) and
Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models, the
estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of tepraloxydim for
acute exposures are estimated to be 1.4 parts per billion (ppb) for
surface water and 0.002 ppb for ground water. EDWCs for chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 0.7 ppb for
surface water and 0.002 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 1.4 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 0.7 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). Tepraloxydim is not
registered for any specific use patterns that would result in
residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' EPA has not found
tepraloxydim to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and tepraloxydim does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that tepraloxydim 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
[[Page 82150]]
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. As discussed in Unit III.A,
there was evidence of increased qualitative and quantitative
susceptibility of fetuses in the rat developmental toxicity study.
There was no evidence of increased susceptibility seen in the rabbit
developmental toxicity study or multi-generation rat reproduction
study. The degree of concern is low for the increased susceptibility
seen in the developmental study in rats (prenatal exposure), since a
clear NOAEL/LOAEL was established for developmental toxicity and the
endpoints of concern are used to assess exposure for the most sensitive
population of concern (i.e., Females 13to 49). There is no residual
uncertainty for prenatal and/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 for all exposure scenarios, except acute
dietary exposure of the general population.
A 10x FQPA Safety Factor in the form of a UFL is
retained for assessing acute dietary risk for the general population,
including infants and children, to account for the uncertainty
resulting from using a LOAEL, rather than a NOAEL, as the POD (i.e., a
NOAEL was not identified in the critical study). The critical effect
(decreased motor activity in females) observed at the LOAEL of 500 mg/
kg/day in the acute neurotoxicity study was neither severe nor
irreversible; and the dose-responsive decrease in motor activity was
observed in females on Day 0 in the absence of any other treatment-
related clinical signs (including functional observation battery) or
neurohistopathological effects. The dose-response relationship of
tepraloxydim indicates that an uncertainty factor of 10x is
sufficiently protective against the critical effect and any other
adverse effects at the aRfD.
The decision to reduce the FQPA SF to 1x for all other exposure
scenarios is based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database is complete except for immunotoxicity
testing (OPPTS Guideline 870.7800). Recent changes to 40 CFR part 158
make this testing required for pesticide registration. In the absence
of specific immunotoxicity studies, EPA has evaluated the available
tepraloxydim toxicity database to determine whether an additional
database uncertainty factor is needed to account for potential
immunotoxicity. No evidence of immunotoxicity was found. Treatment-
related effects seen in the spleen (splenic hematopoiesis) and bone
marrow (hyperplasia) are compensatory responses to tepraloxydim-induced
hemolytic anemia.
Considering the lack of evidence of immunotoxicity in the database
for tepraloxydim, EPA does not believe that conducting an
immunotoxicity study will result in a NOAEL less than that (5 mg/kg/
day) used to derive the current cRfD. Consequently, the EPA believes
the existing data are sufficient for endpoint selection for exposure/
risk assessment purposes and for evaluation of the requirements under
the FQPA, and an additional database uncertainty factor is unnecessary.
ii. In both the acute and subchronic rat neurotoxicity studies,
there were mild changes in motor activity and grip strength indices.
However, EPA has concluded that there is no need for a developmental
neurotoxicity (DNT) study or additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity, based on the following considerations:
Neurotoxic effects were seen at high doses of 500 mg/kg
(\1/4\ of the limit dose), 1,000 mg/kg, and 2,000 mg/kg following bolus
(gavage) dosing in the acute neurotoxicity study and at 428 mg/kg/day
in males and 513 mg/kg/day in females following dietary administration
in the subchronic neurotoxicity study.
In the two-generation reproduction study, no clinical
signs indicative of neurotoxicity were seen in the parental animals or
offspring; nor was there evidence for increased susceptibility of
offspring.
Because a DNT study would necessarily be conducted at high
doses in order to elicit neurotoxicity, it would not yield a POD lower
than those currently used for acute (40 mg/kg [aPAD = 0.40 mg/kg] and
500 mg/kg [cPAD = 0.5 mg/kg]) and chronic (5 mg/kg/day) risk
assessments.
iii. Although there was evidence of increased qualitative and
quantitative susceptibility of fetuses in the rat developmental
toxicity study, the concern for the increased susceptibility is low,
and EPA did not identify any residual uncertainties after establishing
toxicity endpoints and traditional UFs to be used in the risk
assessment of tepraloxydim.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100% crop treated (CT) and tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water
modeling used to assess exposure to tepraloxydim in drinking water.
These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed
by tepraloxydim.
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. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to tepraloxydim will occupy 2.2% of the aPAD for children, 1 to 2 years
old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure. The acute
dietary exposure from food and water to tepraloxydim will occupy 1.0%
or less of the aPAD for all other population subgroups, including
females 13 to 49 years old.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
tepraloxydim from food and water will utilize 9.6% of the cPAD for
children, 1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for tepraloxydim.
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). A short-term
adverse effect was identified; however, tepraloxydim is not registered
for any use patterns that would result in short-term residential
exposure. Short-term risk is assessed based on short-term residential
exposure plus chronic dietary exposure. Because there is no short-term
residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been
assessed under the appropriately
[[Page 82151]]
protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as the POD used to
assess short-term risk), no further assessment of short-term risk is
necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating short-term risk for tepraloxydim.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
tepraloxydim is not registered for any use patterns that would result
in intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for
tepraloxydim.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the results
of two adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies and the explanation
given in Unit III.A, tepraloxydim 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 tepraloxydim residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (gas chromatography/mass
spectrometry (GC/MS) BASF Analytical Method D9701/1) 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.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. Food and
Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards
program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established a MRL for tepraloxydim.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
EPA has reduced the proposed tolerance for Sunflower subgroup 20B
from 0.25 ppm to 0.20 ppm to harmonize with the established MRL in
Canada. Since the highest average field trial residue and maximum field
trial residue for sunflower seed were 0.14 ppm and 0.18 ppm,
respectively, EPA has determined that the Canadian level is adequate to
cover expected residues on commodities in subgroup 20B.
EPA is also revising the introductory text of Sec. 180.573(a)(1),
(a)(2) and (c), which contain the tolerance expression for the existing
and new tolerances, to clarify the chemical moieties that are covered
by the tolerances and specify how compliance with the tolerances is to
be determined. Tolerances for plant commodities are currently expressed
in terms of the combined residues tepraloxydim, 2-[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-
2-propen-1-yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3-hydroxy-5-(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-
2-cyclohexen-1-one, and its metabolites convertible to GP (3-
(tetrahydropyran-4-yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid) and OH-GP (3-hydroxy-3-
(tetrahydropyran-4-yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), calculated as
tepraloxydim. Livestock tolerances are currently expressed in terms of
the combined residues of tepraloxydim and its metabolites convertible
to GP, OH-GP, and GL (3-(2-oyotetrahydropyran-4-yl)-1,5-dioic acid),
calculated as tepraloxydim. The tolerance expression for plants is
being revised to make clear that the tolerances cover residues of
tepraloxydim, including its metabolites and degradates, but that
compliance with the tolerances is to be determined by measuring only
the combined residues of tepraloxydim and its metabolites convertible
to GP and OH-GP, calculated as tepraloxydim. Similarly, the tolerance
expression for livestock commodities is being revised to clarify that
the tolerances cover residues of tepraloxydim, including its
metabolites and degradates, but that compliance with the tolerance
levels will be determined by measuring only the combined residues of
tepraloxydim and its metabolites convertible to GP, OH-GP, and GL,
calculated as tepraloxydim. EPA has determined that it is reasonable to
make these changes final without prior proposal and opportunity for
comment, because public comment is not necessary, in that the changes
have no substantive effect on the tolerances, but rather are merely
intended to clarify the existing tolerance expressions.
Finally, EPA is removing established tolerances for residues of
tepraloxydim on ``Lentil, seed'' and ``Pea, dry, seed'' because
residues on these commodities are covered by the new tolerances for
residues of tepraloxydim on the pea and bean subgroup 6C.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, the established tolerances for residues of tepraloxydim
on ``Lentil, seed'' and ``Pea, dry, seed'' are removed, and new
tolerances are established for residues of tepraloxydim, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on ``Pea and bean, dried shelled,
except soybean, subgroup 6C'' and ``Sunflower subgroup 20B'' as set
forth in the regulatory text.
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
[[Page 82152]]
under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerances in this final
rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not
apply.
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal
Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 14, 2011.
Lois Rossi,
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. Amend Sec. 180.573 as follows:
0
a. Revise the introductory text in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and (c);
0
b. Remove the commodities ``Lentil, seed'' and ``Pea, dry, seed'' from
the table in paragraph (a)(1);
0
c. Add alphabetically the commodities ``Pea and bean, dried shelled,
except soybean, subgroup 6C'' and ``Sunflower subgroup 20B'' and add
footnote 1 to the table in paragraph (a)(1).
The revised and added text read as follows:
Sec. 180.573 Tepraloxydim; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of
tepraloxydim, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by measuring only the combined
residues of tepraloxydim, (2-[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-2-propen-1-
yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3-hydroxy-5-(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-2-
cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites convertible to GP (3-
(tetrahydropyran-4-yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid) and OH-GP (3-hydroxy-3-
(tetrahydropyran-4-yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), calculated as
tepraloxydim, in or on the commodities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * *
Pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C \1\. 0.10
* * * *
Sunflower subgroup 20B \1\................................... 0.20
* * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no U.S. registrations for commodities in this subgroup.
(2) Tolerances are established for residues of tepraloxydim,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in
the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below
is to be determined by measuring only the combined residues of
tepraloxydim (2-[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-2-propen-1-yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3-
hydroxy-5-(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-2-cyclohexen-1-one) and its
metabolites convertible to GP (3-(tetrahydropyran-4-yl)pentane-1,5-
dioic acid), OH-GP (3-hydroxy-3-(tetrahydropyran-4-yl)pentane-1,5-dioic
acid), and GL (3-(2-oxotetrahydropyran-4-yl)-1,5-dioic acid),
calculated as tepraloxydim, in or on the commodities.
* * * * *
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. A tolerance with
regional registration, as defined in Sec. 180.1(l), is established for
residues of tepraloxydim, including its metabolites and degradates, in
or on the commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance
levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only the
combined residues of tepraloxydim (2-[1-[[[(2E)-3-chloro-2-propen-1-
yl]oxy]imino]propyl]-3-hydroxy-5-(tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)-2-
cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites convertible to GP (3-
(tetrahydropyran-4-yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid) and OH-GP (3-hydroxy-3-
(tetrahydropyran-4-yl)pentane-1,5-dioic acid), calculated as
tepraloxydim, in or on the commodities.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-33477 Filed 12-29-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P