Metaflumizone; Pesticide Tolerances, 10381-10387 [2012-3795]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 22, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
calculating annual gas consumption for
each fluorinated GHG and N2O used at
your facility and emissions from the use
of each fluorinated heat transfer fluid.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Ensure that the inventory at the
beginning of one reporting year is
identical to the inventory reported at the
end of the previous reporting year. This
requirement does not apply to the endof-the-year inventory of fluorinated heat
transfer fluids in 2011 and the
beginning-of-the-year inventory of the
same in 2012.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 7. Section 98.95 is amended by
revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 98.95
data.
Procedures for estimating missing
*
*
*
*
*
(b) If you use fluorinated heat transfer
fluids at your facility and are missing
data for one or more of the parameters
in Equation I–16 of this subpart, you
must estimate fluorinated heat transfer
fluid emissions using the arithmetic
average of the emission rates for the
reporting year immediately preceding
the period of missing data and the
months immediately following the
period of missing data. Alternatively,
you may estimate missing information
using records from the fluorinated heat
transfer fluid supplier. You must
document the method used and values
used for all missing data values.
■
■
■
■
■
■
8. Section 98.96 is amended by:
a. Revising paragraph (c)(4).
b. Revising paragraph (r).
c. Revising paragraph (s).
d. Adding paragraph (u).
e. Adding paragraph (v).
§ 98.96
Data reporting requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(4) Each fluorinated heat transfer fluid
emitted as calculated in Equation 1–16
of this subpart.
*
*
*
*
*
(r) For fluorinated heat transfer fluid
emissions, inputs to the fluorinated heat
transfer fluid mass balance equation,
Equation I–16 of this subpart, for each
fluorinated heat transfer fluid used.
(s) Where missing data procedures
were used to estimate inputs into the
fluorinated heat transfer fluid mass
balance equation under § 98.95(b), the
number of times missing data
procedures were followed in the
reporting year, the method used to
estimate the missing data, and the
estimates of those data.
*
*
*
*
*
(u) For each fluorinated heat transfer
fluid used, whether the emission
estimate includes emissions from all
applications or from only the
applications specified in the definition
of fluorinated heat transfer fluids in
§ 98.98.
(v) For reporting year 2012 only, the
date on which you began monitoring
10381
emissions of fluorinated heat transfer
fluids whose vapor pressure falls below
1 mm Hg absolute at 25 °C. This is
either January 1, 2012 or March 23,
2012.
9. Section 98.98 is amended by
removing the definition of ‘‘Heat
transfer fluids’’ and adding the
definition of ‘‘Fluorinated heat transfer
fluids’’ in alphabetical order to read as
follows:
■
§ 98.98
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Fluorinated heat transfer fluids means
fluorinated GHGs used for temperature
control, device testing, cleaning
substrate surfaces and other parts, and
soldering in certain types of electronics
manufacturing production processes.
Fluorinated heat transfer fluids do not
include fluorinated GHGs used as
lubricants or surfactants. For fluorinated
heat transfer fluids under this subpart I,
the lower vapor pressure limit of 1 mm
Hg in absolute at 25 °C in the definition
of Fluorinated greenhouse gas in § 98.6
shall not apply. Fluorinated heat
transfer fluids used in the electronics
manufacturing sector include, but are
not limited to, perfluoropolyethers,
perfluoroalkanes, perfluoroethers,
tertiary perfluoroamines, and
perfluorocyclic ethers.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 10. Table I–2 to Subpart I is revised
to read as follows:
TABLE I–2 TO SUBPART I OF PART 98—EXAMPLES OF FLUORINATED GHGS AND FLUORINATED HEAT TRANSFER FLUIDS
USED BY THE ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY
Product type
Fluorinated GHGs and fluorinated heat transfer fluids used during manufacture
Electronics ..........................
CF4, C2F6, C3F8, c-C4F8, c-C4F8O, C4F6, C5F8, CHF3, CH2F2, NF3, SF6, and fluorinated HTFs (CF3-(O-CF(CF3)CF2)n-(O-CF2)m-O-CF3, CnF2n∂2, CnF2n∂1(O)CmF2m∂1, CnF2nO, (CnF2n∂1)3N).
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
[FR Doc. 2012–3769 Filed 2–21–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
This regulation is effective
February 22, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before April 23, 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–2008–0168. 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
DATES:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0168; FRL–9333–4]
Metaflumizone; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of metaflumizone
in or on citrus fruit, tree nuts, almond
hulls; and grape. BASF Corporation
requested these tolerances under the
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Feb 21, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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.
Julie
Chao, Registration Division (7505P),
Office of Pesticide Programs,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
10382
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 22, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 308–8735; email address:
chao.julie@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.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD 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–
OPP–2008–0168 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 April 23, 2012. Addresses for
mail and hand delivery of objections
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Feb 21, 2012
Jkt 226001
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–2008–0168, 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 August 10,
2011 (76 FR 49396) (FRL–8882–8), 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 7F7260) by BASF
Corporation, P.O. Box 13528, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition
requested that 40 CFR part 180 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the insecticide
metaflumizone, in or on: Fruit, citrus,
group 10 at 0.04 ppm; nut, tree, group
14 at 0.04 ppm; almond, hulls at 0.04
ppm; and grape at 0.04 ppm. 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.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 metaflumizone
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with metaflumizone 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.
Hematotoxicity (toxicity of the blood)
was the primary toxic effect of concern
following subchronic or chronic oral
exposures to metaflumizone. Splenic
extramedullary hematopoiesis,
increased hemosiderin, and anemia
were the most common hematotoxic
effects reported after repeated oral
dosing with metaflumizone. The
postulated pesticidal mode of action of
metaflumizone involves inhibition of
sodium channels in target insect
species; however, in mammals (rats),
there were only clinical signs of
neurotoxicity (i.e., piloerection and
body temperature variations) with no
neuropathology in the presence of
systemic toxicity (e.g., recumbency and
poor general state) following acute or
repeated exposures. Similarly, several
immune system organs seem to be
affected following metaflumizone
administration via the oral, dermal, and
inhalation routes (e.g., the presence of
macrophages in the thymus, lymphocyte
necrosis in the mesenteric lymph nodes,
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 22, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
and diffuse atrophy of the mandibular);
however, there was no evidence of any
functional deficits at the highest dose
tested (HDT) in a recently submitted
and reviewed guideline immunotoxicity
study. Therefore, the clinical
neurotoxicity signs and the effects on
the immune system organs following
metaflumizone administration are likely
to be secondary to the hematotoxic
effects. Metaflumizone induced an
increased incidence of a missing
subclavian artery at a relatively high
dose that also caused severe maternal
toxicity (e.g., late term abortions) in the
developmental toxicity study in rabbits.
There was no evidence (quantitative or
qualitative) of increased susceptibility
following in utero exposures to rats or
rabbit and following pre- and post natal
exposures. There was no evidence that
metaflumizone is genotoxic and
carcinogenicity studies with mice and
rabbits were negative.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by metaflumizone as well
as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in the document
entitled ‘‘Metaflumizone. Revised
Human-Health Risk Assessment
Associated with a Section 3 Registration
for a Fire Ant Bait for Application to
Citrus, Tree Nuts, and Grape, and a new
Section 3 Registration for a Fly Bait for
Application around Industrial,
Commercial, Agricultural, and
Recreational Facilities/Structures and
Premises’’ in docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPP–2008–0168.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which no adverse effects are
observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Feb 21, 2012
Jkt 226001
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 metaflumizone used for
human risk assessment is provided in
this unit:
i. Acute dietary endpoint (general
population including infants and
children). An acute dietary endpoint
was not established for this population
group since an endpoint of concern
(effect) attributable to a single dose was
not identified in the database. Studies
considered for this endpoint included
the acute neurotoxicity study in which
no toxicity was observed at any dose
including the HDT, which is the limit
dose (1,000 milligrams/kilograms/day
(mg/kg/day)).
ii. Acute dietary endpoint (females
13–49 years old). This endpoint was
established based on a developmental
effect observed in the rabbit
developmental toxicity study that can
be potentially due to a single dose of
metaflumizone. This effect consisted of
an increased incidence of an absent
subclavian artery in the offspring at the
LOAEL of 300 mg/kg body/weight/day
(bw/day) metaflumizone (NOAEL = 100
mg/kg bw/day). The rat developmental
toxicity study was also considered for
this endpoint; however, no
developmental effects were observed in
this study at the HDT of 120 mg/kg bw/
day metaflumizone. A combined
uncertainty factor of 300 was applied to
account for interspecies (10X) and
intraspecies (10X) extrapolation and a
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA)
safety factor of 3X. Thus, the acute
population adjusted dose (aPAD) for
females 13–49 years old is estimated to
be 0.33 mg/kg bw/day.
iii. Chronic dietary endpoint. This
endpoint was established based on the
systemic toxicity observed in the
chronic toxicity study with dogs. At the
LOAEL of 30 mg/kg bw/day (NOAEL =
12 mg/kg bw/day), the effects consisted
of reduced general health condition,
slight to severe ataxia, recumbency, and
severe salivation, slight decreases in
mean corpuscular hemoglobin
concentration and total hemoglobin,
leading to increased plasma bilirubin,
increased urinary urobilinogen, and
increased hemosiderin in the liver. A
combined uncertainty factor of 300 was
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10383
applied to account for interspecies (10X)
and intraspecies (10X) extrapolation and
an FQPA safety factor of 3X. Thus, the
chronic population adjusted dose
(cPAD) is estimated to be 0.040 mg/kg
bw/day.
iv. Incidental oral (short- and
intermediate-term). This endpoint was
selected on the basis of the maternal
effects observed in the rat 2-generation
reproductive toxicity study at the
LOAEL of 50 mg/kg bw/day
metaflumizone (NOAEL = 20 mg/kg bw/
day). Maternal toxicity consisted of poor
general health and body weight deficits
which were also associated with
improper nursing behavior. Similar
effects were also noted in a
developmental neurotoxicity study
(gavage, range finding) also considered
for this endpoint. In this study, poor
maternal health was also observed at the
LOAEL of 120 mg/kg bw/day
metaflumizone (NOAEL = 80 mg/kg bw/
day). Both studies considered for this
endpoint achieved a clear NOAEL for
the offspring effects, but the NOAEL of
20 mg/kg bw/day for the 2-generation
reproductive toxicity study is
considered more protective. The
Agency’s level of concern for this
scenario is 300 based on a 10X
intraspecies factor, a 10X interspecies
factor, and an FQPA safety factor of 3X.
v. Dermal (short- and intermediateterm). This endpoint was based on a rat
90-day dermal toxicity study in which
deficits in body weight, body-weight
gain and food consumption (in males
and females); anogenital smearing;
increased macrophages in the thymus;
lymphocyte necrosis in the mesenteric
lymph nodes; diffuse atrophy of the
mandibular lymph node; and increased
hemosiderin in the liver (females only)
were observed at the LOAEL of 300 mg/
kg bw/day (NOAEL = 100 mg/kg bw/
day). The Agency’s level of concern for
this scenario is 100 based on a 10X
interspecies factor, and a 10X
intraspecies factor.
vi. Inhalation (short- and
intermediate-term). There is a 28-day
inhalation study for this exposure
scenario. There was no NOAEL
identified for female rats. At the LOAEL
of 0.10 mg/Liter (L) metaflumizone
(NOAEL = 0.03 mg/L), histopathology of
the nasal tissues, lungs, thymus,
prostate, and adrenal cortex was
observed in males. The LOAEL
identified in females resulted in
lymphocyte necrosis in the mesenteric
lymph node. The Agency’s level of
concern for this scenario is 1,000 based
on a 10X interspecies factor, a 10X
intraspecies factor, and an FQPA safety
factor of 10X. Route-specific toxicity
studies were selected for assessment of
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
10384
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 22, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
short-intermediate-term dermal,
inhalation, and oral exposures. Shortintermediate-term dermal and
inhalation exposures can be aggregated
based on the immunotoxic effects seen
at the LOAEL in the selected studies.
Short/intermediate-term oral, dermal,
and inhalation exposures can be
aggregated based on the decreased body
weight or decreased body-weight gain
effects seen at the LOAEL in the
selected oral and dermal studies and at
doses above the LOAEL in the selected
inhalation study.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to metaflumizone, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances. EPA assessed
dietary exposures from metaflumizone
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 metaflumizone. 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
tolerance-level residues. It was further
assumed that 100% of crops with the
requested uses of metaflumizone were
treated.
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 tolerance-level residues. It was
further assumed that 100% of crops
with the requested uses of
metaflumizone were treated.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that metaflumizone does not
pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore,
a dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did
not use anticipated residue or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for metaflumizone. Tolerance level
residues and/or 100 PCT were assumed
for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Feb 21, 2012
Jkt 226001
for metaflumizone in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
metaflumizone. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI–
GROW) models, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of
metaflumizone for acute exposures are
estimated to be 1.14 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 0.00214 ppb
for ground water. The EDWCs of
metaflumizone for chronic exposures for
non-cancer chronic assessments are
estimated to be 0.597 ppb for surface
water and 0.00214 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 1.14 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 0.597 ppb was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
Metaflumizone is currently registered
for the following uses that could result
in residential exposures: Pet spot-on
products to control fleas on dogs and
cats; fire ant bait products for
application to lawns, landscapes, golf
courses, and other non-cropland area. In
addition, a pending fly bait product is
proposed for use in areas where people
may be present; therefore, a residential
exposure assessment was performed for
this use.
EPA assessed residential exposure
using the following assumptions: For
the pet spot-on products, residential
handler exposure is not expected,
because the product is applied directly
from a tube to the pet. Pet spot-on
applications are expected to result in
short- and intermediate-term postapplication dermal exposure to all
populations, and incident oral exposure
(i.e., hand-to-mouth) for children 3 to <6
years of age. For the fire ant bait,
applications to home lawns are
expected to result in short-term,
residential handler exposure to adults.
Fire ant bait applications to lawns,
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
landscapes, golf-courses, and other noncropland areas are expected to result in
short-term, post-application dermal
exposure to adults, adolescents, and
children 3 to <6 years old, and incident
oral exposure for children 3 to <6 years
old. For the pending fly bait product,
residential handler exposure is not
expected, because the product is
applied by commercial handlers. The
pending fly bait product is expected to
result in short-term, post-application
dermal exposure to adults and children
3 to <6 years old, and incident oral
exposure to children 3 to <6 years old.
For residential handlers, dermal and
inhalation exposures are combined
since the endpoints are similar for these
routes. For children (3 to <6 year olds),
post-application hand-to-mouth and
dermal exposures are combined. Since
the levels of concern (LOCs) for the
dermal, inhalation and incidental oral
routes are not the same (dermal LOC =
100, inhalation LOC = 1,000, and
incidental oral LOC = 300), these routes
were combined using the aggregate risk
index approach. Further information
regarding EPA standard assumptions
and generic inputs for residential
exposures may be found at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/
trac6a05.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found metaflumizone to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
metaflumizone does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that metaflumizone does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity
with other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 22, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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. In applying this
provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There is no evidence for increased
qualitative or quantitative sensitivity/
susceptibility resulting from prenatal
and/or postnatal exposures. In the rat
prenatal development toxicity study,
there was no offspring toxicity reported
at any dose tested whereas in the rabbit
study a maltransformation based on an
absent subclavian artery was noted to
occur only in the presence of severe
maternal toxicity. Similarly, offspring
mortality in the 2-generation
reproductive toxicity occurred only in
the presence of a poor maternal health
state. Thus, there is no evidence for
increased susceptibility.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA safety
factor were reduced from 10X to 3X for
all oral exposure scenarios; retained at
10X for inhalation exposure scenarios;
and reduced to 1X for dermal exposures.
That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for
metaflumizone is complete.
ii. There is no indication that
metaflumizone directly affects the
nervous system. Clinical signs
consisting of piloerection and body
temperature variations were observed
only in the absence of neuropathology
and in the presence of a poor general
state. There is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional uncertainty factors to account
for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
metaflumizone results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary analyses assumed tolerancelevel residues, 100 PCT, and modeled
drinking water estimates. Therefore,
HED concludes that while the
submission of data/information by the
petitioner addressing the residue
chemistry deficiencies may conceivably
result in adjustment of the maximum
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Feb 21, 2012
Jkt 226001
theoretical residue estimate, actual
metaflumizone dietary exposure
estimates will not be greater than those
generated in the current risk assessment.
EPA made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground and surface
water modeling used to assess exposure
to metaflumizone in drinking water.
EPA used similarly conservative
assumptions to assess postapplication
exposure of children as well as
incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by metaflumizone.
v. Dietary exposures (which are more
relevant for human exposures) exhibited
an approximately 2-fold greater
absorption into the systemic circulation
and, thus, can potentially lead to
toxicity at 2-fold lower levels of
exposure. Applying a FQPA safety
factor of 3X for all oral exposure
scenarios is adequate to protect against
any greater toxicity that might occur in
dietary exposures (absorption was noted
to be 2-fold greater in dietary versus oral
gavage studies).
vi. The FQPA safety factor of 10X is
being retained for inhalation exposure
scenarios for the use of a LOAEL instead
of a NOAEL (no NOAEL achieved) for
histopathological lesions consisting of
lymphocyte necrosis in the mesenteric
lymph node. The FQPA safety factor of
10X is adequate due to the severity of
lymphocyte necrosis being minimal to
slight and not exhibiting a strong dose
dependence.
vii. The FQPA safety factor for dermal
exposure scenarios is being reduced
from 10X to 1X since there is a routespecific study with a clear NOAEL.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to
metaflumizone will occupy <1% of the
aPAD for females 13–49 years old. An
acute dietary exposure estimate was
generated for females 13–49 years old,
but not for the remaining population
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10385
subgroups since an endpoint attributed
to a single dose was not identified for
those populations.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to metaflumizone
from food and water will utilize <1% of
the cPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in
Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of metaflumizone is not
expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Metaflumizone is
currently registered for uses that could
result in short-term residential
exposure, and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with short-term residential
exposures to metaflumizone. Since the
level of concern (LOC) is different for
dermal and oral exposures (100 and 300,
respectively), the aggregate risk index
method was used to determine aggregate
risk (aggregate risk indices > 1 are not
a risk of concern).
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures result in aggregate
risk indices of 3 for the general
population, and 2 for children 1–2 years
old. Since the LOCs for the dermal,
inhalation and incidental oral routes are
not the same (dermal LOC = 100,
inhalation LOC = 1,000, and incidental
oral LOC = 300), these routes were
combined using the aggregate risk index
approach. Because EPA’s LOC for
metaflumizone is an aggregate risk
index less than 1, the aggregate risks are
not of concern. These aggregate risk
indices utilize residential exposure
estimates from the pet spot-on products,
which represent the worst-case
exposure scenario. However, it should
be noted that all registered pet spot-on
products containing metaflumizone are
pending voluntary cancellation;
therefore, these aggregate risk indices
can be considered conservative.
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).
Metaflumizone is currently registered
for uses that could result in
intermediate-term residential exposure;
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
10386
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 22, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
however, since the PODs for the shortand intermediate-term durations are the
same for metaflumizone, the short-term
aggregate assessment is protective of
longer-term exposures.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
metaflumizone 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
metaflumizone residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(liquid chromatograph/mass
spectrometer/mass spectrometer (LC/
MS/MS) Method 531/0) 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
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 metaflumizone.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of metaflumizone, (E and Z
isomers; 2-[2-(4-cyanophenyl)-1-[3(trifluoromethyl) phenyl]ethylidene]-N[4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]
hydrazinecarboxamide) and its
metabolite 4-{2-oxo-2-[3-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Feb 21, 2012
Jkt 226001
(trifluoromethyl) phenyl]ethyl}benzonitrile, in or on: Fruit, citrus,
group 10 at 0.04 ppm; nut, tree, group
14 at 0.04 ppm; almond, hulls at 0.04
ppm; and grape at 0.04 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances
under section 408(d) of FFDCA in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory
Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this final rule
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB
approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., nor does it require any special
considerations under Executive Order
12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
and food retailers, not States or tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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: February 3, 2012.
Steven Bradbury,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.657 is added to subpart
C to read as follows:
■
§ 180.657 Metaflumizone; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of the
insecticide metaflumizone, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities listed in the following
table. Compliance with the tolerance
levels specified in the following table is
to be determined by measuring only the
sum of metaflumizone (E and Z isomers;
2-[2-(4-cyanophenyl)-1-[3(trifluoromethyl) phenyl]ethylidene]-N[4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 22, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
hydrazinecarboxamide) and its
metabolite 4-{2-oxo-2-[3(trifluoromethyl) phenyl]ethyl}benzonitrile, calculated as the
stoichiometric equivalent of
metaflumizone, in or on the following
commodities:
Superfund Docket, Mailcode: 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460. Attention Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–SFUND–2011–0965. Such deliveries
Parts per are only accepted during the Docket’s
Commodity
million
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
Almond, hulls ................................
0.04
deliveries of boxed information.
Fruit, citrus, group 10 ...................
0.04
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Grape ............................................
0.04
Nut, tree, group 14 .......................
0.04 Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–SFUND–2011–
0965. EPA’s policy is that all comments
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
[Reserved]
made available online at
(c) Tolerances with regional
www.regulations.gov, including any
registrations. [Reserved]
personal information provided, unless
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues.
the comment includes information
[Reserved]
claimed to be Confidential Business
[FR Doc. 2012–3795 Filed 2–21–12; 8:45 am]
Information (CBI) or other information
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
protected through www.regulations.gov
AGENCY
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
40 CFR Part 302
which means EPA will not know your
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2011–0965; FRL–9635–9]
identity or contact information unless
Designation of Hazardous Substances; you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an email
Designation, Reportable Quantities,
comment directly to EPA without going
and Notification
through www.regulations.gov, your
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
email address will be automatically
Agency (EPA).
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
ACTION: Direct final rule.
docket and made available on the
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
Internet. If you submit an electronic
action to reinstate the maximum
comment, EPA recommends that you
observed constituent concentrations for
include your name and other contact
several listed hazardous wastes that
information in the body of your
were inadvertently removed from the
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
regulations by a November 8, 2000 final you submit. If EPA cannot read your
rule.
comment due to technical difficulties
DATES: This rule is effective on April 23, and cannot contact you for clarification,
2012 without further notice, unless EPA EPA may not be able to consider your
receives adverse comment by March 23, comment. Electronic files should avoid
2012. If EPA receives adverse comment, the use of special characters, any form
we will publish a timely withdrawal in
of encryption, and be free of any defects
the Federal Register informing the
or viruses. For additional information
public that the rule will not take effect.
about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
Docket: All documents in the docket
SFUND–2011–0965, by one of the
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
following methods:
index. Although listed in the index,
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
some information is not publicly
on-line instructions for submitting
available, e.g., CBI or other information
comments.
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
• Email: superfund.docket@epa.gov.
Certain other material, such as
• Fax: 202–566–9744.
• Mail: Environmental Protection
copyrighted material, will be publicly
Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
available only in hard copy. Publicly
10387
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA–HQ–SFUND–2011–0965
docket. This Docket Facility is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Superfund Docket
telephone number is (202) 566–0276.
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC.
For
general information, contact the
Superfund, TRI, EPCRA, RMP and Oil
Information Center at (800) 424–9346 or
TDD (800) 553–7672 (hearing impaired).
In the Washington, DC metropolitan
area, call (703) 412–9810 or TDD (703)
412–3323. For more detailed
information on specific aspects of this
direct final rule, contact Lynn Beasley at
(202) 564–1965 (beasley.lynn@epa.gov),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0002, Mail Code
5104A.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Why is EPA using a direct final rule?
EPA is publishing this rule without a
prior proposed rule because we view
this as a noncontroversial action and
anticipate no adverse comment. This
action merely reinstates the maximum
observed constituent concentrations for
several listed hazardous wastes that
were inadvertently removed from
regulations by a November 8, 2000 final
rule. However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’
section of today’s Federal Register, we
are also publishing a separate proposed
rule to reinstate these same maximum
observed constituent concentrations for
several listed hazardous wastes that
were inadvertently removed from the
regulations if adverse comments are
received on this direct final rule. We
will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at
this time. For further information about
commenting on this rule, see the
ADDRESSES section of this document.
If EPA receives adverse comment, we
will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public
that this direct final rule will not take
effect until EPA addresses all public
comments in any subsequent final rule
based on the proposed rule.
II. Does this action apply to me?
Type of entity
Examples of affected entities
Federal Agencies ............................
National Response Center and any Federal agency that may release or respond to releases of hazardous
substances.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Feb 21, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 22, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10381-10387]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3795]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0168; FRL-9333-4]
Metaflumizone; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
metaflumizone in or on citrus fruit, tree nuts, almond hulls; and
grape. BASF Corporation requested these tolerances under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective February 22, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 23, 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-2008-0168. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at https://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic
docket at https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Chao, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
[[Page 10382]]
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 308-8735; email
address: chao.julie@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.
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-2008-0168 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
April 23, 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-2008-0168, 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 August 10, 2011 (76 FR 49396) (FRL-8882-
8), 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
7F7260) by BASF Corporation, P.O. Box 13528, Research Triangle Park, NC
27709. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide metaflumizone,
in or on: Fruit, citrus, group 10 at 0.04 ppm; nut, tree, group 14 at
0.04 ppm; almond, hulls at 0.04 ppm; and grape at 0.04 ppm. 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.
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 metaflumizone including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with metaflumizone
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.
Hematotoxicity (toxicity of the blood) was the primary toxic effect
of concern following subchronic or chronic oral exposures to
metaflumizone. Splenic extramedullary hematopoiesis, increased
hemosiderin, and anemia were the most common hematotoxic effects
reported after repeated oral dosing with metaflumizone. The postulated
pesticidal mode of action of metaflumizone involves inhibition of
sodium channels in target insect species; however, in mammals (rats),
there were only clinical signs of neurotoxicity (i.e., piloerection and
body temperature variations) with no neuropathology in the presence of
systemic toxicity (e.g., recumbency and poor general state) following
acute or repeated exposures. Similarly, several immune system organs
seem to be affected following metaflumizone administration via the
oral, dermal, and inhalation routes (e.g., the presence of macrophages
in the thymus, lymphocyte necrosis in the mesenteric lymph nodes,
[[Page 10383]]
and diffuse atrophy of the mandibular); however, there was no evidence
of any functional deficits at the highest dose tested (HDT) in a
recently submitted and reviewed guideline immunotoxicity study.
Therefore, the clinical neurotoxicity signs and the effects on the
immune system organs following metaflumizone administration are likely
to be secondary to the hematotoxic effects. Metaflumizone induced an
increased incidence of a missing subclavian artery at a relatively high
dose that also caused severe maternal toxicity (e.g., late term
abortions) in the developmental toxicity study in rabbits. There was no
evidence (quantitative or qualitative) of increased susceptibility
following in utero exposures to rats or rabbit and following pre- and
post natal exposures. There was no evidence that metaflumizone is
genotoxic and carcinogenicity studies with mice and rabbits were
negative.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by metaflumizone as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in the document entitled ``Metaflumizone. Revised
Human-Health Risk Assessment Associated with a Section 3 Registration
for a Fire Ant Bait for Application to Citrus, Tree Nuts, and Grape,
and a new Section 3 Registration for a Fly Bait for Application around
Industrial, Commercial, Agricultural, and Recreational Facilities/
Structures and Premises'' in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0168.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for metaflumizone used for
human risk assessment is provided in this unit:
i. Acute dietary endpoint (general population including infants and
children). An acute dietary endpoint was not established for this
population group since an endpoint of concern (effect) attributable to
a single dose was not identified in the database. Studies considered
for this endpoint included the acute neurotoxicity study in which no
toxicity was observed at any dose including the HDT, which is the limit
dose (1,000 milligrams/kilograms/day (mg/kg/day)).
ii. Acute dietary endpoint (females 13-49 years old). This endpoint
was established based on a developmental effect observed in the rabbit
developmental toxicity study that can be potentially due to a single
dose of metaflumizone. This effect consisted of an increased incidence
of an absent subclavian artery in the offspring at the LOAEL of 300 mg/
kg body/weight/day (bw/day) metaflumizone (NOAEL = 100 mg/kg bw/day).
The rat developmental toxicity study was also considered for this
endpoint; however, no developmental effects were observed in this study
at the HDT of 120 mg/kg bw/day metaflumizone. A combined uncertainty
factor of 300 was applied to account for interspecies (10X) and
intraspecies (10X) extrapolation and a Food Quality Protection Act
(FQPA) safety factor of 3X. Thus, the acute population adjusted dose
(aPAD) for females 13-49 years old is estimated to be 0.33 mg/kg bw/
day.
iii. Chronic dietary endpoint. This endpoint was established based
on the systemic toxicity observed in the chronic toxicity study with
dogs. At the LOAEL of 30 mg/kg bw/day (NOAEL = 12 mg/kg bw/day), the
effects consisted of reduced general health condition, slight to severe
ataxia, recumbency, and severe salivation, slight decreases in mean
corpuscular hemoglobin concentration and total hemoglobin, leading to
increased plasma bilirubin, increased urinary urobilinogen, and
increased hemosiderin in the liver. A combined uncertainty factor of
300 was applied to account for interspecies (10X) and intraspecies
(10X) extrapolation and an FQPA safety factor of 3X. Thus, the chronic
population adjusted dose (cPAD) is estimated to be 0.040 mg/kg bw/day.
iv. Incidental oral (short- and intermediate-term). This endpoint
was selected on the basis of the maternal effects observed in the rat
2-generation reproductive toxicity study at the LOAEL of 50 mg/kg bw/
day metaflumizone (NOAEL = 20 mg/kg bw/day). Maternal toxicity
consisted of poor general health and body weight deficits which were
also associated with improper nursing behavior. Similar effects were
also noted in a developmental neurotoxicity study (gavage, range
finding) also considered for this endpoint. In this study, poor
maternal health was also observed at the LOAEL of 120 mg/kg bw/day
metaflumizone (NOAEL = 80 mg/kg bw/day). Both studies considered for
this endpoint achieved a clear NOAEL for the offspring effects, but the
NOAEL of 20 mg/kg bw/day for the 2-generation reproductive toxicity
study is considered more protective. The Agency's level of concern for
this scenario is 300 based on a 10X intraspecies factor, a 10X
interspecies factor, and an FQPA safety factor of 3X.
v. Dermal (short- and intermediate-term). This endpoint was based
on a rat 90-day dermal toxicity study in which deficits in body weight,
body-weight gain and food consumption (in males and females);
anogenital smearing; increased macrophages in the thymus; lymphocyte
necrosis in the mesenteric lymph nodes; diffuse atrophy of the
mandibular lymph node; and increased hemosiderin in the liver (females
only) were observed at the LOAEL of 300 mg/kg bw/day (NOAEL = 100 mg/kg
bw/day). The Agency's level of concern for this scenario is 100 based
on a 10X interspecies factor, and a 10X intraspecies factor.
vi. Inhalation (short- and intermediate-term). There is a 28-day
inhalation study for this exposure scenario. There was no NOAEL
identified for female rats. At the LOAEL of 0.10 mg/Liter (L)
metaflumizone (NOAEL = 0.03 mg/L), histopathology of the nasal tissues,
lungs, thymus, prostate, and adrenal cortex was observed in males. The
LOAEL identified in females resulted in lymphocyte necrosis in the
mesenteric lymph node. The Agency's level of concern for this scenario
is 1,000 based on a 10X interspecies factor, a 10X intraspecies factor,
and an FQPA safety factor of 10X. Route-specific toxicity studies were
selected for assessment of
[[Page 10384]]
short-intermediate-term dermal, inhalation, and oral exposures. Short-
intermediate-term dermal and inhalation exposures can be aggregated
based on the immunotoxic effects seen at the LOAEL in the selected
studies. Short/intermediate-term oral, dermal, and inhalation exposures
can be aggregated based on the decreased body weight or decreased body-
weight gain effects seen at the LOAEL in the selected oral and dermal
studies and at doses above the LOAEL in the selected inhalation study.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to metaflumizone, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
metaflumizone 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 metaflumizone. 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 tolerance-level residues. It was further assumed that 100% of
crops with the requested uses of metaflumizone were treated.
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 tolerance-
level residues. It was further assumed that 100% of crops with the
requested uses of metaflumizone were treated.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that metaflumizone does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary
assessment for metaflumizone. Tolerance level residues and/or 100 PCT
were assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for metaflumizone in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of metaflumizone. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
metaflumizone for acute exposures are estimated to be 1.14 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.00214 ppb for ground water. The
EDWCs of metaflumizone for chronic exposures for non-cancer chronic
assessments are estimated to be 0.597 ppb for surface water and 0.00214
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 1.14 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 0.597 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). Metaflumizone is
currently registered for the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Pet spot-on products to control fleas on dogs
and cats; fire ant bait products for application to lawns, landscapes,
golf courses, and other non-cropland area. In addition, a pending fly
bait product is proposed for use in areas where people may be present;
therefore, a residential exposure assessment was performed for this
use.
EPA assessed residential exposure using the following assumptions:
For the pet spot-on products, residential handler exposure is not
expected, because the product is applied directly from a tube to the
pet. Pet spot-on applications are expected to result in short- and
intermediate-term post-application dermal exposure to all populations,
and incident oral exposure (i.e., hand-to-mouth) for children 3 to <6
years of age. For the fire ant bait, applications to home lawns are
expected to result in short-term, residential handler exposure to
adults. Fire ant bait applications to lawns, landscapes, golf-courses,
and other non-cropland areas are expected to result in short-term,
post-application dermal exposure to adults, adolescents, and children 3
to <6 years old, and incident oral exposure for children 3 to <6 years
old. For the pending fly bait product, residential handler exposure is
not expected, because the product is applied by commercial handlers.
The pending fly bait product is expected to result in short-term, post-
application dermal exposure to adults and children 3 to <6 years old,
and incident oral exposure to children 3 to <6 years old.
For residential handlers, dermal and inhalation exposures are
combined since the endpoints are similar for these routes. For children
(3 to <6 year olds), post-application hand-to-mouth and dermal
exposures are combined. Since the levels of concern (LOCs) for the
dermal, inhalation and incidental oral routes are not the same (dermal
LOC = 100, inhalation LOC = 1,000, and incidental oral LOC = 300),
these routes were combined using the aggregate risk index approach.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found metaflumizone to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and metaflumizone does not appear
to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
metaflumizone does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for
[[Page 10385]]
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. In applying this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no evidence for
increased qualitative or quantitative sensitivity/susceptibility
resulting from prenatal and/or postnatal exposures. In the rat prenatal
development toxicity study, there was no offspring toxicity reported at
any dose tested whereas in the rabbit study a maltransformation based
on an absent subclavian artery was noted to occur only in the presence
of severe maternal toxicity. Similarly, offspring mortality in the 2-
generation reproductive toxicity occurred only in the presence of a
poor maternal health state. Thus, there is no evidence for increased
susceptibility.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA safety factor were reduced from 10X to 3X for all oral exposure
scenarios; retained at 10X for inhalation exposure scenarios; and
reduced to 1X for dermal exposures. That decision is based on the
following findings:
i. The toxicity database for metaflumizone is complete.
ii. There is no indication that metaflumizone directly affects the
nervous system. Clinical signs consisting of piloerection and body
temperature variations were observed only in the absence of
neuropathology and in the presence of a poor general state. There is no
need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional uncertainty
factors to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that metaflumizone results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary analyses assumed tolerance-level residues, 100
PCT, and modeled drinking water estimates. Therefore, HED concludes
that while the submission of data/information by the petitioner
addressing the residue chemistry deficiencies may conceivably result in
adjustment of the maximum theoretical residue estimate, actual
metaflumizone dietary exposure estimates will not be greater than those
generated in the current risk assessment. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to metaflumizone in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure
of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
metaflumizone.
v. Dietary exposures (which are more relevant for human exposures)
exhibited an approximately 2-fold greater absorption into the systemic
circulation and, thus, can potentially lead to toxicity at 2-fold lower
levels of exposure. Applying a FQPA safety factor of 3X for all oral
exposure scenarios is adequate to protect against any greater toxicity
that might occur in dietary exposures (absorption was noted to be 2-
fold greater in dietary versus oral gavage studies).
vi. The FQPA safety factor of 10X is being retained for inhalation
exposure scenarios for the use of a LOAEL instead of a NOAEL (no NOAEL
achieved) for histopathological lesions consisting of lymphocyte
necrosis in the mesenteric lymph node. The FQPA safety factor of 10X is
adequate due to the severity of lymphocyte necrosis being minimal to
slight and not exhibiting a strong dose dependence.
vii. The FQPA safety factor for dermal exposure scenarios is being
reduced from 10X to 1X since there is a route-specific study with a
clear NOAEL.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to metaflumizone will occupy <1% of the aPAD for females 13-49 years
old. An acute dietary exposure estimate was generated for females 13-49
years old, but not for the remaining population subgroups since an
endpoint attributed to a single dose was not identified for those
populations.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
metaflumizone from food and water will utilize <1% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
metaflumizone is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Metaflumizone
is currently registered for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is
appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with
short-term residential exposures to metaflumizone. Since the level of
concern (LOC) is different for dermal and oral exposures (100 and 300,
respectively), the aggregate risk index method was used to determine
aggregate risk (aggregate risk indices > 1 are not a risk of concern).
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in aggregate risk indices of 3 for the
general population, and 2 for children 1-2 years old. Since the LOCs
for the dermal, inhalation and incidental oral routes are not the same
(dermal LOC = 100, inhalation LOC = 1,000, and incidental oral LOC =
300), these routes were combined using the aggregate risk index
approach. Because EPA's LOC for metaflumizone is an aggregate risk
index less than 1, the aggregate risks are not of concern. These
aggregate risk indices utilize residential exposure estimates from the
pet spot-on products, which represent the worst-case exposure scenario.
However, it should be noted that all registered pet spot-on products
containing metaflumizone are pending voluntary cancellation; therefore,
these aggregate risk indices can be considered conservative.
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). Metaflumizone is currently registered for uses that could
result in intermediate-term residential exposure;
[[Page 10386]]
however, since the PODs for the short- and intermediate-term durations
are the same for metaflumizone, the short-term aggregate assessment is
protective of longer-term exposures.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, metaflumizone 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 metaflumizone residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (liquid chromatograph/mass
spectrometer/mass spectrometer (LC/MS/MS) Method 531/0) 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 metaflumizone.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
metaflumizone, (E and Z isomers; 2-[2-(4-cyanophenyl)-1-[3-
(trifluoromethyl) phenyl]ethylidene]-N-[4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]
hydrazinecarboxamide) and its metabolite 4-{2-oxo-2-[3-
(trifluoromethyl) phenyl]ethyl{time} -benzonitrile, in or on: Fruit,
citrus, group 10 at 0.04 ppm; nut, tree, group 14 at 0.04 ppm; almond,
hulls at 0.04 ppm; and grape at 0.04 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal
Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 3, 2012.
Steven Bradbury,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. Section 180.657 is added to subpart C to read as follows:
Sec. 180.657 Metaflumizone; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
insecticide metaflumizone, including its metabolites and degradates, in
or on the commodities listed in the following table. Compliance with
the tolerance levels specified in the following table is to be
determined by measuring only the sum of metaflumizone (E and Z isomers;
2-[2-(4-cyanophenyl)-1-[3-(trifluoromethyl) phenyl]ethylidene]-N-[4-
(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]
[[Page 10387]]
hydrazinecarboxamide) and its metabolite 4-{2-oxo-2-[3-
(trifluoromethyl) phenyl]ethyl{time} -benzonitrile, calculated as the
stoichiometric equivalent of metaflumizone, in or on the following
commodities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almond, hulls................................................ 0.04
Fruit, citrus, group 10...................................... 0.04
Grape........................................................ 0.04
Nut, tree, group 14.......................................... 0.04
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2012-3795 Filed 2-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P