Fluopyram; Pesticide Tolerances, 10968-10976 [2012-4321]
Download as PDF
10968
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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.
identified and discussed later in this
document. Bayer Crop Science
requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
This regulation is effective
February 24, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before April 24, 2012, and must
Dated: February 9, 2012.
be filed in accordance with the
Steven Bradbury,
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
amended as follows:
docket for this action under docket
PART 180—[AMENDED]
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2009–0364. All documents in the
■ 1. The authority citation for part 180
docket are listed in the docket index
continues to read as follows:
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
■ 2. Section 180.655 is added to read as
e.g., Confidential Business Information
follows:
(CBI) or other information whose
§ 180.655 Flazasulfuron; tolerances for
disclosure is restricted by statute.
residues.
Certain other material, such as
(a) General. Tolerances are
copyrighted material, is not placed on
established for residues of flazasulfuron, the Internet and will be publicly
including its metabolites and
available only in hard copy form.
degradates, in or on the commodities in Publicly available docket materials are
the table below. Compliance with the
available in the electronic docket at
tolerance levels specified below is to be https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
determined by measuring only
available in hard copy, at the OPP
flazasulfuron (N-[[(4,6-dimethoxy-2Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S–
pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]-34400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
(trifluoromethyl)-22777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The
pyridinesulfonamide).
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
Parts per
Commodity
excluding legal holidays. The Docket
million
Facility telephone number is (703) 305–
Fruit, citrus, group 10–10 ...........
0.01 5805.
Grape ..........................................
0.01 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa
Sugarcane ..................................
0.01 Jones, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
[Reserved]
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001;
(c) Tolerances with regional
telephone number: (703) 308–9424;
registrations. [Reserved]
email address: jones.lisa@epa.gov.
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[Reserved]
DATES:
[FR Doc. 2012–4332 Filed 2–23–12; 8:45 am]
I. General Information
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
A. Does this action apply to me?
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0364; FRL–9336–9]
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Fluopyram; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of fluopyram in
or on multiple commodities which are
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Feb 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 to https://www.epa.gov/ocspp and
select ‘‘Test Methods and Guidelines.’’
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2009–0364 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 24, 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–2009–0364, 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
E:\FR\FM\24FER1.SGM
24FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 January 6,
2010 (75 FR 864) (FRL–8801–5), EPA
issued a notice pursuant to section
408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of two
pesticide petitions (PP 8F7358 and
8F7463) by Bayer Crop Science, 2.T.W.
Alexander Drive, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27709.
Petition 8F7358 requested that 40 CFR
part 180 be amended by establishing
tolerances on residues of the fungicide,
fluopyram, N-[2-[3-chloro-5(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]ethyl]-2(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including
its metabolites and degradates in or on
the following commodities: Grape at 2.0
parts per million (ppm); strawberry at
2.0 ppm; and tomato at 1.0 ppm. A
subsequent petition 8F7463 requested
that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by
establishing additional tolerances on
residues of the fungicide, fluopyram, N[2-[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2pyridinyl]ethyl]-2(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including
its metabolites and degradates in or on
the following commodities: Alfalfa,
forage at 0.25 ppm; alfalfa, hay at 0.80
ppm; almond, hulls at 8.0 ppm; apple,
wet pomace at 2.5 ppm; artichoke at 2.0
ppm; banana at 1.0 ppm; beet, sugar,
roots at 0.10 ppm; berry, low growing,
subgroup 13–07G at 2.0 ppm; Brassica,
head and stem, subgroup 5A at 3.0 ppm;
Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 5B at 35
ppm; bushberries, subgroup 13–07B at
10 ppm; caneberries, subgroup 13–07A
at 5.0 ppm; citrus, oil at 10 ppm; corn,
sweet, kernel plus cob with husk
removed at 0.10 ppm; cotton, gin
byproducts at 0.05 ppm; cotton,
undelinted seed at 0.10 ppm; fruit,
citrus, group 10 at 1.0 ppm; fruit, pome,
group 11 at 1.0 ppm; fruit, small, vine,
climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit,
subgroup 13–07F at 2.0 ppm; fruit,
stone, group 12 at 2.0 ppm; grain, cereal,
forage, fodder and straw, group 16,
except rice, forage at 8.0 ppm; grain,
cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Feb 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
16, except rice, hay, straw and stover at
14 ppm; grain, cereal, forage, fodder and
straw, group 16, except rice, aspirated
fractions at 50 ppm; grain, cereal, group
15, except rice and sweet corn at 3.0
ppm; grape, raisin at 3.5 ppm; grass,
forage, fodder and hay, group 17, forage
at 80 ppm; grass, forage, fodder and hay,
group 17, hay at 30 ppm; herbs,
subgroup 19A, fresh at 50 ppm; herbs,
subgroup 19A, dried at 260 ppm; hop,
dried cones at 100 ppm; nut, tree, group
(including pistachio) 14 at 0.05 ppm;
okra at 8.0 ppm; oilseed, group 20,
except cotton at 5.0 ppm; onion, bulb,
subgroup 3–07A at 0.30 ppm; onion,
green, subgroup 3–07B at 20 ppm;
peanut at 0.05 ppm; peanut, hay at 50
ppm, pepper, non-bell at 8.0 ppm;
potato, processed potato waste at 0.15
ppm; soybean, aspirated fractions at 70
ppm; soybean, forage at 8.0 ppm;
soybean, hay at 30 ppm; soybean, hulls
at 0.40 ppm; soybean, seed at 0.30 ppm;
spices, except black pepper, subgroup
19B at 100 ppm; vegetable, cucurbit,
group 9 at 1.0 ppm; vegetable, foliage of
legume, except soybean, subgroup 7A,
forage at 30 ppm; vegetable, foliage of
legume, except soybean, subgroup 7A,
hay at 75 ppm; vegetable, foliage of
legume, except soybean, subgroup 7A,
vines at 16 ppm; vegetable, fruiting,
except non-bell pepper, group 8 at 1.0
ppm; vegetable, leafy, except Brassica,
group 4 at 35 ppm; vegetable, leaves of
root and tuber, group 2 at 30 ppm;
vegetable, legume, edible podded,
subgroup 6A at 2.0 ppm; vegetable,
legume, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B
at 0.20 ppm; vegetable, pea and bean,
dried shelled (except soybean),
subgroup 6C at 0.50 ppm; vegetable,
root and tuber, except sugar beet,
subgroup 1B at 0.50 ppm; and vegetable,
tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.05
ppm.
This petition (8F7463) also requested
that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by
establishing tolerances on residues of
the fungicide, fluopyram, N-[2-[3chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2pyridinyl]ethyl]-2(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including
its metabolites and degradates, in or on
the following commodities: Cattle, fat at
0.10 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.10 ppm;
cattle, meat byproducts, except liver at
0.10 ppm; cattle, liver at 1.2 ppm; eggs
at 0.1 ppm; goat, fat at 0.10 ppm; goat,
meat at 0.10 ppm; goat, meat
byproducts, except liver at 0.10 ppm;
goat, liver at 1.2 ppm; hog, fat at 0.01
ppm; hog, meat at 0.01 ppm; hog, meat
byproducts, except liver at 0.01 ppm;
hog, liver at 0.15 ppm; horse, fat at 0.10
ppm; horse, meat at 0.10 ppm; horse,
meat byproducts, except liver at 0.10
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10969
ppm; horse, liver at 1.2 ppm, milk at 1.2
ppm; poultry, fat at 0.05 ppm; poultry,
meat at 0.03 ppm; poultry, meat
byproducts at 0.20 ppm; sheep, fat at
0.10 ppm; sheep, meat at 0.10 ppm;
sheep, meat byproducts, except liver at
0.10 ppm; and sheep, liver at 1.2 ppm.
That notice referenced a summary of
the petitions prepared by Bayer Crop
Science, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov.
One comment was received from a
private citizen who opposed the
manufacturing and selling of this
product due to the lack of available bee
information. This comment is
considered irrelevant because the safety
standard for approving tolerances under
section 408 of the FFDCA is directed
solely at the safety of the pesticide
residues in food to the food consumer
and does not permit consideration of
environmental effects on bees.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petitions, EPA has
revised tolerance levels. Subsequently,
the petitions have been further modified
per Bayer Crop Science’s request to
withdraw a majority of the primary
crops initially proposed for this action,
and expanded the original rotatable
crops of alfalfa and cotton to include
canola, soybean, and cereals grains
except rice, December 8, 2011 (76 FR
76676) (FRL–9328–8). The reason for
these changes is explained in Unit
IV.D.START.
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
E:\FR\FM\24FER1.SGM
24FER1
10970
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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 fluopyram
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with fluopyram 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.
Decreased body weight and liver
effects were the common and frequent
findings in the fluopyram subchronic
and chronic oral toxicity studies in rats,
mice, and dogs, and they appeared to be
the most sensitive effects. Liver effects
were characterized by increased liver
weight, hepatocellular hypertrophy,
hepatocellular vacuolation, increased
mitosis and hepatocellular necrosis. In
the carcinogenicity study, increased
liver tumors were also observed in
female rats. Liver effects in rodents were
seen at lower dose levels than those in
the dogs. Thyroid effects were found at
dose levels similar to those that
produced liver effects in rats and mice;
these effects consisted of follicular cell
hypertrophy, increased thyroid weight
and hyperplasia at dose levels greater
than or equal to 100 milligrams/
kilogram/day (mg/kg/day). Changes in
thyroid hormone levels were also seen
in a subchronic toxicity study. In male
mice, there was an increased incidence
of thyroid adenomas.
Fluopyram is classified as ‘‘Likely to
be Carcinogenic to Humans’’ and a unit
risk, Q1*, of 1.55 × 10¥2 (mg/kg/day)¥1
was used for the linear low dose
extrapolation of cancer risk based on
liver tumors in female rats; thyroid
tumors were also observed in male
mice. Fluopyram is not genotoxic or
mutagenic.
Fluopyram is not a developmental
toxicant, nor did it adversely affect
reproductive parameters. No evidence of
qualitative or quantitative susceptibility
was observed in developmental studies
in rats and rabbits or in a
multigeneration study in rats.
In an acute neurotoxicity study,
transient decreased motor activity was
seen only on the day of treatment, but
no other findings demonstrating
neurotoxicity were observed. In
addition, no neurotoxicity was observed
in the subchronic neurotoxicity study in
the presence of other systemic adverse
effects. Fluopyram did not produce
treatment-related effects on the immune
system.
Fluopyram has low acute toxicity via
the oral, dermal and inhalation routes of
exposure. Fluopyram is not a skin or eye
irritant or sensitizer under the
conditions of the murine lymph node
assay.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by fluopyram 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
‘‘Fluopyram: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Uses on
Apples, Bananas (Import only), Cherries
(Sweet and Tart), Dried Beans, Peanuts,
Potatoes, Strawberries, Sugar Beets, Tree
Nuts, Watermelon, and Wine Grapes’’
beginning at Appendix A, pages 41–47
in docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2009–0364.
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.
The details for selecting toxicity
endpoints and points of departure for
various exposure scenarios can be found
at https://www.regulations.gov in the
document ‘‘Fluopyram: Human Health
Risk Assessment for Proposed Uses on
Apples, Bananas (Import only), Cherries
(Sweet and Tart), Dried Beans, Peanuts,
Potatoes, Strawberries, Sugar Beets, Tree
Nuts, Watermelon, and Wine Grapes’’ in
Appendix A on pages 47–66 in docket
ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0364.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for fluopyram used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR FLUOPYRAM FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Point of departure
Uncertainty/
FQPA safety factors
RfD, PAD, Level of concern for risk assessment
Study and toxicological
effects
Acute Dietary (General
Population, including Infants and Children).
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Exposure/scenario
NOAEL= 50 mg/kg/day .....
UFA= 10X ..........................
UFH=10X
FQPA SF=1X
aRfD = 0.50 mg/kg/day .....
aPAD = 0.50 mg/kg/day
Acute Neurotoxicity Study
in Rats.
The LOAEL of 100 mg/kg
in females is based on
decreased motor and locomotor activity in females.
The LOAEL in males was
125 mg/kg/day.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Feb 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24FER1.SGM
24FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
10971
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR FLUOPYRAM FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT—Continued
Exposure/scenario
Uncertainty/
FQPA safety factors
Point of departure
RfD, PAD, Level of concern for risk assessment
Study and toxicological
effects
Acute Dietary (Females
13–49 years of age).
An endpoint attributable to a single dose exposure has not been identified for this subpopulation.
Chronic Dietary (All Populations).
NOAEL= 1.2 mg/kg/day ....
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation).
Based on the liver tumor in female rats, EPA classified fluopyram as a ‘‘Likely to be Carcinogenic to Human’’ and
recommended the use of linear low dose extrapolation model for risk assessment using a unit risk, Q1* = 1.55 ×
10¥2 (mg/kg/day)¥1.
UFA= 10X ..........................
UFH=
10X
FQPA SF=1X
cRfD = 0.012 mg/kg/day ...
cPAD = 0.012 mg/kg/day
Combined Chronic/Carcinogenicity in Rats.
The LOAEL of 6.0 mg/kg/
day is based on follicular
cell hypertrophy in the
thyroid, and increased
liver weight with gross
pathological and
histopathological findings.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is derived from observed dose-response data and used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally relevant human exposures. NOAEL = no observed adverse effect
level. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH =
potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose (a = acute, c = chronic). mg/kg/day = milligrams/kilogram/day.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to fluopyram, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from fluopyram 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 fluopyram. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food
consumption information from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1994–1996 and 1998 Nationwide
Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII). The acute dietary
analysis included tolerance residue
levels, 100% crop treated assumption
and processing factors (empirical and
default).
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998
CSFII. The chronic dietary analysis
included average residue levels from
crop field trials, 100% crop treated
assumption, and processing factors
(empirical and default).
iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether
quantitative cancer exposure and risk
assessments are appropriate for a fooduse pesticide based on the weight of the
evidence from cancer studies and other
relevant data. If quantitative cancer risk
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Feb 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
assessment is appropriate, cancer risk
may be quantified using a linear or
nonlinear approach. If sufficient
information on the carcinogenic mode
of action is available, a threshold or
non-linear approach is used and a
cancer RfD is calculated based on an
earlier noncancer key event. If
carcinogenic mode of action data are not
available, or if the mode of action data
determines a mutagenic mode of action,
a default linear cancer slope factor
approach is utilized. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that fluopyram should be
classified as ‘‘Likely to be Carcinogenic
to Humans’’ and a linear approach has
been used to quantify cancer risk. The
cancer dietary analysis included average
residue levels from crop field trials,
processing factors (empirical and
default, commercial and household),
and percent crop treated (PCT)
estimates.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA used tolerance level
residues and assumed 100% crop
treated in the acute dietary assessment
for fluopyram. For the chronic dietary
assessment, EPA used average residues
from field trials and 100% CT
information. The cancer dietary risk
assessment used average residues from
field trials and projected percent crop
treated estimates based on processing
factors.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA
authorizes EPA to use available data and
information on the anticipated residue
levels of pesticide residues in food and
the actual levels of pesticide residues
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
that have been measured in food. If EPA
relies on such information, EPA must
require pursuant to FFDCA section
408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years
after the tolerance is established,
modified, or left in effect, demonstrating
that the levels in food are not above the
levels anticipated. For the present
action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
as are required by FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be
required to be submitted no later than
5 years from the date of issuance of
these tolerances.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states
that the Agency may use data on the
actual percent of food treated for
assessing chronic dietary risk only if:
• Condition a: The data used are
reliable and provide a valid basis to
show what percentage of the food
derived from such crop is likely to
contain the pesticide residue.
• Condition b: The exposure estimate
does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group.
• Condition c: Data are available on
pesticide use and food consumption in
a particular area, the exposure estimate
does not understate exposure for the
population in such area.
In addition, the Agency must provide
for periodic evaluation of any estimates
used. To provide for the periodic
evaluation of the estimate of PCT as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F),
EPA may require registrants to submit
data on PCT.
The Agency estimated the PCT for
new uses as follows:
E:\FR\FM\24FER1.SGM
24FER1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
10972
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Almonds: 33%; apples: 40%; barley:
22%; dry beans: 7%; cherry: 49%;
cotton: 7%; grapes: 79%; oats: 23%;
peanuts: 67%; potatoes: 64%; rapeseed:
73%; rye: 63%; sorghum: 12%;
soybeans: 1%; strawberries: 71%; sugar
beets: 48%; watermelon: 54%; and
wheat: 1%.
EPA’s estimate of the percent crop
treated for the new uses of fluopyram
represents the upper bound of use
expected during the pesticide’s initial 5
years of registration; that is, the percent
crop treated for fluopyram is a threshold
of use that EPA is reasonably certain
will not be exceeded for this registered
use site. The percent crop treated for use
in the chronic dietary assessment is
calculated as the average percent crop
treated of the market leader or leaders
(i.e., the pesticides with the greatest
percent crop treated) on that crop over
the 3 most recent years of available data.
The percent crop treated for use in the
acute dietary assessment is the
maximum observed percent crop treated
over the same period. Comparisons are
only made among pesticides of the same
pesticide types (e .g., the market leader
for fungicides on the use crop is
selected for comparison with a new
fungicide). The market leader included
in the estimation may not be the same
for each year since different pesticides
may dominate at different times.
To calculate these percent crop
treated values, EPA used recent data
from the National Agricultural Statistics
Service (NASS) 2002–2006, and recent
proprietary data (2006–2010). The
estimates for the primary crops are
based on the market leader approach
involving several registered fungicides,
and the estimates for the rotational
crops are based on acres of wheat, corn,
sorghum, barley, oats, rye, millet,
soybeans, canola, cotton, and alfalfa
grown relative to the total acreage of dry
beans and potatoes treated with
fluopyram.
The Agency believes that the three
conditions discussed in Unit III.C.1.iv.
have been met. With respect to
Condition a, PCT estimates are derived
from Federal and private market survey
data, which are reliable and have a valid
basis. The Agency is reasonably certain
that the percentage of the food treated
is not likely to be an underestimation.
As to Conditions b and c, regional
consumption information and
consumption information for significant
subpopulations is taken into account
through EPA’s computer-based model
for evaluating the exposure of
significant subpopulations including
several regional groups. Use of this
consumption information in EPA’s risk
assessment process ensures that EPA’s
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Feb 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant
subpopulation group and allows the
Agency to be reasonably certain that no
regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those
estimated by the Agency. Other than the
data available through national food
consumption surveys, EPA does not
have available reliable information on
the regional consumption of food to
which fluopyram may be applied in a
particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for fluopyram in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of fluopyram.
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.
Environmental fate studies indicate
that the parent fluopyram is stable
under environmental conditions.
Reported half-lives range from 89 days
in field and aqueous photolysis studies
to >1,000 days in aerobic/anaerobic
water/sediment systems. Fluopyram is
mobile in soil and can therefore, be
expected to occur in surface water
runoff and/or in ground water leachate.
Upper-bound ground water estimates
were derived using the Tier I Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI–
GROW) model. Surface water estimates
were partially refined by incorporating
a foliar degradation rate into the Tier II
Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure
Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/
EXAMS) model. The foliar decay rate
was calculated from field trial studies in
which residues were determined at
various intervals following foliar
application; no rain or irrigation
occurring during the study period. All
other inputs reflect high-end
assumptions regarding application rates
and percent cropped area (PCA) in the
watershed.
Based on the Tier II PRZM/EXAMS
and SCI–GROW models the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)
of fluopyram for acute exposures are 13
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water
and 0.32 ppb for ground water. The
EDWCs of fluopyram for chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments
are estimated to be 4.9 ppb for surface
water and 0.32 ppb for ground water
and the EDWCs of fluopyram chronic
exposures for cancer assessments are
estimated to be 3.5 ppb for surface water
and 0.32 ppb for ground water.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
acute dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value 13 ppb (1 in 10 year
annual peak) based on a maximum
application rate of 0.446 lb ai/A/season
(cucumber) was used to access the
contribution to drinking water. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration of value 4.9 ppb
(1 in 10 year annual mean) based on a
maximum application rate of 0.356 lb
active ingredient/Acre (a.i./A)/season
(potato) was used to access the
contribution to drinking water. For
cancer dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration of value 3.5 ppb
(1 in 30 year annual mean) based on a
maximum application rate of 0.356 lb
a.i./A/season (potato) was used to access
the contribution of 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).
Fluopyram 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 fluopyram to share a common
mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and fluopyram does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has assumed that
fluopyram does not have a common
mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding
EPA’s efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism
of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals,
see EPA’s Web site at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
E:\FR\FM\24FER1.SGM
24FER1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
The available developmental toxicity
studies in rats and rabbits and the multigeneration reproduction in rats
demonstrate no evidence of increased
susceptibility in the developing or
young animals which were exposed
during prenatal or postnatal periods.
Decreased fetal body weight was
observed at levels equal to or greater
than the maternal LOAEL in both rat
and rabbit developmental studies.
Likewise, body weight effects were seen
in offspring at levels equal to the
parental LOAEL in the rat 2-generation
reproductive toxicity study.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for fluopyram
is complete and includes the
immunotoxicity study and neurotoxicity
screening battery.
ii. The fluopyram toxicology database
did not demonstrate evidence of
neurotoxicity. Although transient
decreases in motor and locomotor
activities in the acute neurotoxicity
study on the day of treatment and
limited use of hind-limbs and reduced
motor activity in the rat chronic/
carcinogenicity study were seen, there
were no other associated
neurobehavioral or histopathology
changes found in other studies in the
fluopyram toxicity database. The effects
seen in the chronic/carcinogenicity
study were in the presence of increased
mortality and morbidity such as general
pallor and appearance. Therefore, the
reduced motor activity and limited use
of hind-limbs seen in these two studies
were judged to be the consequence of
the systemic effects and not direct
neurotoxicity. There is no indication
that fluopyram is a neurotoxic chemical
and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
fluopyram results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Feb 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
in young rats in the multi-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
in the exposure database. Although
extended field rotational crop studies
are required as a condition of
registration, the rotational crop
tolerances used in the dietary risk
assessment are not expected to
underestimate exposure because they
are based on crop residue results from
direct foliar treatment as opposed to
residues taken up by plants through
roots from treated soil. The acute dietary
exposure assessment was performed
using tolerance level residues for all
crops whereas the chronic dietary
assessment included average field trial
residue levels for all crops. Both acute
and chronic assessments assumed 100%
crop treated and incorporated empirical
or default processing factors. The
dietary exposure assessment also
assumed that all drinking water will
contain fluopyram at the highest EDWC
levels modeled by the Agency for
ground or surface water. Residential
exposures are not expected. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to fluopyram in
drinking water. These assessments will
not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by fluopyram.
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
fluopyram will occupy 8.8% of the
aPAD for children 1 to 2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to fluopyram from
food and water will utilize 13% of the
cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses
for fluopyram.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10973
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). Because no short-term
adverse effect was identified; fluopyram
is not expected to pose a short-term risk.
A short-term adverse effect was
identified; however, fluopyram 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 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
fluopyram.
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).
Because no intermediate-term effect was
identified, fluopyram is not expected to
pose an intermediate-term risk. An
intermediate-term adverse effect was
identified; however, fluopyram 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 short-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
fluopyram.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
the cancer risk assessment, EPA has
concluded that exposure to fluopyram
from food and water will result in a
lifetime cancer risk of 2.9 × 10¥6 for the
general U.S. population. EPA generally
considers cancer risks in the range of
1 in 1 million (1 × 10¥6) or less to be
negligible. The precision which can be
assumed for cancer risk estimates is best
described by rounding to the nearest
integral order of magnitude on the log
scale; for example, risks falling between
E:\FR\FM\24FER1.SGM
24FER1
10974
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
3 × 10¥7 and 3 × 10¥6 are expressed as
risks in the range of 10¥6. Considering
the precision with which cancer hazard
can be estimated, the conservativeness
of low-dose linear extrapolation, and the
rounding procedure described above,
cancer risk should generally not be
assumed to exceed the benchmark level
of concern of the range of 10¥6 until the
calculated risk exceeds approximately
3 × 10¥6. This is particularly the case
where some conservatism is maintained
in the exposure assessment.
Although the fluopyram exposure risk
assessment is refined, it retains some
conservatism due, among other things,
to the use of field trial data to estimate
residues in food and the use of high-end
assumptions to estimate residues in
water. Accordingly, EPA has concluded
the cancer risk from aggregate exposure
to fluopyram falls within the range of
1 × 10¥6 and is thus negligible.
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 fluopyram
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
The German multiresidue method
DFG Method S 19, a gas
chromatography with mass selective
detection (GC/MSD) method, has been
proposed for the enforcement of
tolerances for fluopyram residues in or
on crop commodities, and a high
performance liquid chromatography
method with tandem mass spectrometry
detection (HPLC/MS/MS), Method
01079, has been proposed for the
enforcement of tolerances for residues of
fluopyram and its metabolite, AE
C656948-benzamide, in livestock
commodities. The validated limit of
quantitation (LOQ) is 0.01 ppm for each
analyte in each matrix. The proposed
enforcement method for plant
commodities (DFG Method S19) and
livestock commodities (Method 01079)
are deemed adequate as enforcement
methods. Adequate HPLC/MS/MS
methods were used for data collection
for crop and livestock commodities. The
FDA multiresidue methods of PAM Vol.
I are suitable for the determination of
fluopyram in non-fatty matrices (using
Section 302), but are not suitable for
detection of AE C656948-benzamide
residues. 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–
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Feb 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
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.
Codex Maximum Residue Limits
(CXLs) have been established for grape
at 2 ppm and dried grapes (raisins) at 5
ppm; milk at 0.07 ppm; mammalian
meat at 0.1 ppm, and edible offal
mammalian (meat byproducts) at 0.7
ppm. For the purpose of international
harmonization, EPA is establishing U.S.
tolerances for wine grape at 2.0 ppm
(raised from 1.4 ppm); milk at 0.07 ppm
(raised from 0.06 ppm); and hog meat
byproducts at 0.70 ppm (raised from
0.45 ppm).
The Codex MRL for grapes is based on
field trials conducted in Europe, and is
calculated by rounding up of the
statistically determined 1.3 ppm to 2
ppm. A U.S. tolerance for dried grapes
(raisins) is not needed as the tolerance
request is for wine-type grapes only,
which are not converted to raisins.
Harmonization of recommended U.S.
tolerances for meat and meat byproducts
(other than hog) with Codex MRLs
cannot be achieved. The Codex MRL for
livestock is calculated on the basis of
the diets listed in Annex 6 of the 2009
JMPR Report (OECD Feedstuffs Derived
from Field Crops) and the use of a
reasonable worst case diet/feed
approach (RWCF). The dietary burden
was calculated using only grape pomace
residue and 20% contribution to the
Australian dairy and beef cattle diets.
The U.S. tolerance was based on
guidance ‘‘Revisions of Feedstuffs in
(Table 1) OPPTS Test Guideline
860.1000’’ and ‘‘Guidance on
Constructing Maximum Reasonably
Balanced Diets (MRBD)’’. Based on the
U.S. livestock diets (which does not
include grape pomace) and the cattle
feeding study, the meat byproduct
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(cattle, goat horse, sheep) tolerances
need to be set at 1.1 ppm, a higher level
than the 0.7 Codex MRL for edible offal.
Similarly, the U.S. meat tolerances for
these animals need to be set higher than
the Codex MRL (0.15 versus 0.1 ppm).
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
Because the Agency’s preliminary risk
assessment of fluopyram determined
that aggregate exposure to fluopyram
potentially exceeded safe levels, the
petitioner withdrew tolerance proposals
and registration requests for the
following crops: Crop Group 1B Root
vegetable; 1C Tuberous and corm
vegetable (except potatoes and
sugarbeet); Crop Group 2 Leaves of root
and tuberous vegetables, Crop
subgroups 3–07A and B Bulb vegetables;
Crop Group 4 Leafy vegetables; Crop
Group 5 Brassica; Crop Group 6A Edible
legumes; Crop Group 6B Succulent
beans and peas; Crop Group 6C (part)
Dried peas and some dried beans,
(except soybeans); Crop Group 7 Foliage
of legume vegetables; Crop Group 8
Fruiting vegetables; Crop Group 10
Citrus; Crop Group 11 Pome fruit
(except apple); Crop subgroups 13–07A
and B Caneberries and Bushberries;
Crop subgroup 13–07F Vine fruit
(except wine grapes); Crop subgroup
13–07G Low growing berries (except
strawberry); Crop Group 15 Cereal
Grains (except for rotational purposes);
Crop Group16 Forage Cereals (except for
rotational purposes); Crop Group17
Grasses grown for forage or seed; Crop
Group18 Non grass animal feeds; Crop
Group19 Herbs and Spices; Crop Group
20 Oilseeds (except canola); Hops;
Globe artichoke; Christmas Trees; Turf;
and Ornamentals.
The petitioner subsequently,
submitted a revised registration
specifying uses only on the following
crops: Apple; banana (no U.S.
registration); bean, dry; beet, sugar, root;
cherry (sweet and tart); grape, wine; nut
tree crop group 14; peanut; pistachio;
potatoes; strawberry; and watermelon.
Based on the available field trial data,
and NAFTA tolerance calculation
procedures, the Agency recommended
appropriate tolerance levels for
individual commodities as opposed to
levels proposed for crop groups.
However, although the petitioner
proposed a tolerance for ‘‘nut, tree,
group 14 (including pistachio)’’ at 0.05
ppm, EPA determined that separate
tolerances must be established for the
tree nut crop group and pistachio
because pistachio is not at this time
included in crop group 14. The
available data indicate that 0.05 ppm is
an appropriate level for these tolerances.
E:\FR\FM\24FER1.SGM
24FER1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
The petitioner has proposed
tolerances for combined residues of
fluopyram and AE C656948-benzamide
in egg; milk; the fat, meat, and meat
byproducts of poultry; and the fat, liver,
meat, and meat byproducts (except
liver) of cattle, goat, hog, horse, and
sheep. The estimated livestock dietary
burden and available feeding study data
indicate that most of the proposed
tolerances for livestock commodities are
too low. In addition, EPA no longer
establishes separate tolerances for liver
(it is accounted for in the meat
byproducts of livestock animals). Based
on the NAFTA calculator, the Agency
recommended higher tolerances.
The revised registration permits crop
rotation to alfalfa, cotton, canola, cereal
grains (except rice), and soybean with
certain restrictions. However, extensive
field rotational crop data for these crops
are not available. In the absence of
sufficient rotational crop data, highly
conservative target crop residue data
were used for setting tolerance for
rotational crops. The preference was to
select an intermediate level between the
confined accumulation/limited field
rotational crop data and primary crop
data for the target rotated crops so as to
discourage potential misuse (i.e., direct
foliar application) and provide adequate
maximum residue levels for legal uses
according to label instructions. Thus,
pending extensive field rotational crop
data, EPA recommends interim
rotational crop tolerances be set at half
of the calculated primary crop
tolerances with a PBI of 30 days.
In addition, the Agency determined
tolerances were not required for the
following petitioned commodities: Beet,
sugar, tops; corn, sweet, kernel plus cob
with husk removed; grain, cereal, forage,
fodder and straw, group 16, except rice,
aspirated fractions; and soybean hulls,
thus, these tolerances have been
removed. Tolerances were not needed
for the following reasons: the tolerance
for the commodity corn, sweet, kernel
plus cob with husk removed is covered
under grain, cereal, group 15, except
rice; Bayer withdrew their requests for
tolerances for grain, cereal, forage,
fodder and straw, group 16, except rice;
aspirated fractions and soybean, hulls;
and the sugar beet top tolerance was
withdrawn because sugar beet tops are
no longer considered a major livestock
commodity.
Moreover, EPA is revising certain
crop definitions (as proposed) for the
following: almond, hulls; beet, sugar,
roots; eggs; grain, cereal, group 15,
except rice and sweet corn. The correct
commodity terminology are almond,
hull; beet, sugar, root; egg; and grain,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Feb 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
cereal, group 15, except rice,
respectively.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of fluopyram, in or on
multiple commodities as shown in the
codified text below.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances
under section 408(d) of FFDCA in
response to petitions 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,
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10975
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 2, 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 180.661 is added to subpart
C to read as follows:
■
§ 180.661 Fluopyram; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are
established for residues of the fungicide
Fluopyram, N-[2-[3-chloro-5(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]ethyl]-2(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including
its metabolites and degradates in or on
the commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified in the table is to be
E:\FR\FM\24FER1.SGM
24FER1
10976
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
determined by measuring only
fluopyram in or on the commodity.
Parts
per million
Commodity
Almond, hull ..............................
Apple .........................................
Apple, wet pomace ...................
Banana 1 ...................................
Bean, dry ..................................
Beet, sugar, root .......................
Cherry .......................................
Grape, wine ..............................
Nut, tree, group 14 ...................
Peanut ......................................
Pistachio ...................................
Potato .......................................
Potato, processed potato waste
Strawberry ................................
Watermelon ..............................
1 There
8.0
0.30
0.60
1.0
0.09
0.04
0.60
2.0
0.05
0.02
0.05
0.02
0.08
1.5
1.0
are no U.S. registrations.
(2) Tolerances are established for
residues of the fungicide fluopyram, N[2-[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2pyridinyl]ethyl]-2(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including
its metabolites and degradates.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified in the table below is to be
determined by measuring only the sum
of fluopyram and its metabolite, 2(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, calculated
as the stoichiometric equivalent of
fluopyram, in or on the commodity.
Commodity
Parts per
million
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Cattle, fat ..................................
Cattle, meat ..............................
Cattle, meat byproducts ...........
Egg ...........................................
Goat, fat ....................................
Goat, meat ................................
Goat, meat byproducts .............
Hog, fat .....................................
Hog, meat .................................
Hog, meat byproducts ..............
Horse, fat ..................................
Horse, meat ..............................
Horse, meat byproducts ...........
Milk ...........................................
Poultry, fat ................................
Poultry, meat ............................
Poultry, meat byproducts ..........
Sheep, fat .................................
Sheep, meat .............................
Sheep, meat byproducts ..........
0.11
0.15
1.1
0.25
0.11
0.15
1.1
0.05
0.05
0.70
0.11
0.15
1.1
0.07
0.20
0.15
0.60
0.11
0.15
1.1
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. It
is recommended that tolerances be
established for indirect or inadvertent
residues of fungicide fluopyram, N-[2[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2pyridinyl]ethyl]-2(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including
its metabolites and degradates, in or on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:50 Feb 23, 2012
Jkt 226001
the commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified in the table is to be
determined by measuring only
fluopyram in or on the commodity.
Æ 252.227–7014 Revises the clause
date and corrects paragraph numbers
referenced in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) and
(b)(6) of the clause.
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 252
Parts per
million
Commodity
Alfalfa, forage ...........................
Alfalfa, hay ................................
Canola, seed ............................
Cotton, gin byproducts .............
Cotton, undelinted seed ...........
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder
and straw, group 16, except
rice; forage ............................
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder
and straw, group 16, except
rice; hay, straw and stover ...
Grain, cereal, group 15, except
rice ........................................
Soybean, forage .......................
Soybean, hay ............................
Soybean, seed ..........................
0.45
1.1
1.8
0.05
0.01
Government procurement.
Ynette R. Shelkin,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations
System.
Therefore, 48 CFR part 252 is
amended as follows:
4.0
PART 252—SOLICITATION
PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT
CLAUSES
7.0
■
1.5
4.0
15
0.10
[FR Doc. 2012–4321 Filed 2–23–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR
part 252 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
252.212–7001
[Amended]
2. Section 252.212–7001 is amended
by removing the clause date
‘‘(JANUARY 2012)’’ and adding ‘‘(FEB
2012)’’ in its place, in paragraph (b)(20),
removing ‘‘(SEP 2011)’’ and adding
‘‘(FEB 2012)’’ in its place, and in
paragraph (c)(2), removing ‘‘(SEP 2011)’’
and adding ‘‘(FEB 2012)’’ in its place.
■
48 CFR Part 252
252.227–7013
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement; Technical
Amendment
■
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
DoD is making technical
amendments to the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement
(DFARS) to provide needed editorial
changes.
DATES: Effective Date: February 24,
2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Ynette Shelkin, Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L)
DPAP (DARS), Room 3B855, 3060
Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC
20301–3060. Telephone 703–602–8384;
facsimile 703–602–7887.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final
rule amends the DFARS as follows:
Æ 252.212–7001 Revises the clause
date and makes conforming changes to
the dates of the DFARS clauses
referenced in paragraphs (b)(20) and
(c)(2) of the clause.
Æ 252.227–7013 Revises the clause
date and corrects paragraph numbers
referenced in paragraphs (b)(2)(i)(A),
(b)(4), and (b)(6) of the clause.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[Amended]
3. Section 252.227–7013 is amended
by removing the clause date ‘‘(SEP
2011)’’ and adding ‘‘(FEB 2012)’’ in its
place, in paragraph (b)(2)(i)(A),
removing ‘‘as provided in paragraphs
(b)(ii) and (b)(iv) through (b)(ix) of this
clause’’ and adding ‘‘as provided in
paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (b)(1)(iv)
through (b)(1)(ix) of this clause’’ in its
place, in paragraph (b)(4), removing
‘‘enumerated in paragraph (a)(13) of this
clause’’ and adding ‘‘enumerated in
paragraph (a)(14) of this clause’’ in its
place, and in paragraph (b)(6), removing
‘‘in accordance with paragraph (a)(13)’’
and adding ‘‘in accordance with
paragraph (a)(14)’’ in its place.
252.227–7014
[Amended]
4. Section 252.227–7014 is amended
by removing the clause date ‘‘(MAR
2011)’’ and adding ‘‘(FEB 2012)’’ in its
place, in paragraph (b)(4)(i), removing
‘‘enumerated in paragraph (a)(14) of this
clause or lesser rights in computer
software documentation than are
enumerated in paragraph (a)(13)’’ and
adding ‘‘enumerated in paragraph
(a)(15) of this clause or lesser rights in
computer software documentation than
are enumerated in paragraph (a)(14)’’ in
its place, and in paragraph (b)(6),
removing ‘‘made in accordance with
paragraph (a)(14)’’ and adding ‘‘made in
■
E:\FR\FM\24FER1.SGM
24FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 37 (Friday, February 24, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10968-10976]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4321]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0364; FRL-9336-9]
Fluopyram; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
fluopyram in or on multiple commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. Bayer Crop Science requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective February 24, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 24, 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-2009-0364. 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: Lisa Jones, Registration Division,
Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 308-9424; email address: jones.lisa@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 to https://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ``Test Methods and
Guidelines.''
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0364 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 24, 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-2009-0364, 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
[[Page 10969]]
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 January 6, 2010 (75 FR 864) (FRL-8801-
5), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of two pesticide petitions (PP
8F7358 and 8F7463) by Bayer Crop Science, 2.T.W. Alexander Drive,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.
Petition 8F7358 requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by
establishing tolerances on residues of the fungicide, fluopyram, N-[2-
[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]ethyl]-2-
(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including its metabolites and degradates in
or on the following commodities: Grape at 2.0 parts per million (ppm);
strawberry at 2.0 ppm; and tomato at 1.0 ppm. A subsequent petition
8F7463 requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing
additional tolerances on residues of the fungicide, fluopyram, N-[2-[3-
chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]ethyl]-2-
(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including its metabolites and degradates in
or on the following commodities: Alfalfa, forage at 0.25 ppm; alfalfa,
hay at 0.80 ppm; almond, hulls at 8.0 ppm; apple, wet pomace at 2.5
ppm; artichoke at 2.0 ppm; banana at 1.0 ppm; beet, sugar, roots at
0.10 ppm; berry, low growing, subgroup 13-07G at 2.0 ppm; Brassica,
head and stem, subgroup 5A at 3.0 ppm; Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup
5B at 35 ppm; bushberries, subgroup 13-07B at 10 ppm; caneberries,
subgroup 13-07A at 5.0 ppm; citrus, oil at 10 ppm; corn, sweet, kernel
plus cob with husk removed at 0.10 ppm; cotton, gin byproducts at 0.05
ppm; cotton, undelinted seed at 0.10 ppm; fruit, citrus, group 10 at
1.0 ppm; fruit, pome, group 11 at 1.0 ppm; fruit, small, vine,
climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F at 2.0 ppm; fruit,
stone, group 12 at 2.0 ppm; grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw,
group 16, except rice, forage at 8.0 ppm; grain, cereal, forage, fodder
and straw, group 16, except rice, hay, straw and stover at 14 ppm;
grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except rice,
aspirated fractions at 50 ppm; grain, cereal, group 15, except rice and
sweet corn at 3.0 ppm; grape, raisin at 3.5 ppm; grass, forage, fodder
and hay, group 17, forage at 80 ppm; grass, forage, fodder and hay,
group 17, hay at 30 ppm; herbs, subgroup 19A, fresh at 50 ppm; herbs,
subgroup 19A, dried at 260 ppm; hop, dried cones at 100 ppm; nut, tree,
group (including pistachio) 14 at 0.05 ppm; okra at 8.0 ppm; oilseed,
group 20, except cotton at 5.0 ppm; onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A at 0.30
ppm; onion, green, subgroup 3-07B at 20 ppm; peanut at 0.05 ppm;
peanut, hay at 50 ppm, pepper, non-bell at 8.0 ppm; potato, processed
potato waste at 0.15 ppm; soybean, aspirated fractions at 70 ppm;
soybean, forage at 8.0 ppm; soybean, hay at 30 ppm; soybean, hulls at
0.40 ppm; soybean, seed at 0.30 ppm; spices, except black pepper,
subgroup 19B at 100 ppm; vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 at 1.0 ppm;
vegetable, foliage of legume, except soybean, subgroup 7A, forage at 30
ppm; vegetable, foliage of legume, except soybean, subgroup 7A, hay at
75 ppm; vegetable, foliage of legume, except soybean, subgroup 7A,
vines at 16 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, except non-bell pepper, group 8
at 1.0 ppm; vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group 4 at 35 ppm;
vegetable, leaves of root and tuber, group 2 at 30 ppm; vegetable,
legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A at 2.0 ppm; vegetable, legume,
succulent shelled, subgroup 6B at 0.20 ppm; vegetable, pea and bean,
dried shelled (except soybean), subgroup 6C at 0.50 ppm; vegetable,
root and tuber, except sugar beet, subgroup 1B at 0.50 ppm; and
vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.05 ppm.
This petition (8F7463) also requested that 40 CFR part 180 be
amended by establishing tolerances on residues of the fungicide,
fluopyram, N-[2-[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]ethyl]-2-
(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including its metabolites and degradates,
in or on the following commodities: Cattle, fat at 0.10 ppm; cattle,
meat at 0.10 ppm; cattle, meat byproducts, except liver at 0.10 ppm;
cattle, liver at 1.2 ppm; eggs at 0.1 ppm; goat, fat at 0.10 ppm; goat,
meat at 0.10 ppm; goat, meat byproducts, except liver at 0.10 ppm;
goat, liver at 1.2 ppm; hog, fat at 0.01 ppm; hog, meat at 0.01 ppm;
hog, meat byproducts, except liver at 0.01 ppm; hog, liver at 0.15 ppm;
horse, fat at 0.10 ppm; horse, meat at 0.10 ppm; horse, meat
byproducts, except liver at 0.10 ppm; horse, liver at 1.2 ppm, milk at
1.2 ppm; poultry, fat at 0.05 ppm; poultry, meat at 0.03 ppm; poultry,
meat byproducts at 0.20 ppm; sheep, fat at 0.10 ppm; sheep, meat at
0.10 ppm; sheep, meat byproducts, except liver at 0.10 ppm; and sheep,
liver at 1.2 ppm.
That notice referenced a summary of the petitions prepared by Bayer
Crop Science, the registrant, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
One comment was received from a private citizen who opposed the
manufacturing and selling of this product due to the lack of available
bee information. This comment is considered irrelevant because the
safety standard for approving tolerances under section 408 of the FFDCA
is directed solely at the safety of the pesticide residues in food to
the food consumer and does not permit consideration of environmental
effects on bees.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petitions, EPA has
revised tolerance levels. Subsequently, the petitions have been further
modified per Bayer Crop Science's request to withdraw a majority of the
primary crops initially proposed for this action, and expanded the
original rotatable crops of alfalfa and cotton to include canola,
soybean, and cereals grains except rice, December 8, 2011 (76 FR 76676)
(FRL-9328-8). The reason for these changes is explained in Unit
IV.D.START.
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
[[Page 10970]]
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
fluopyram including exposure resulting from the tolerances established
by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with
fluopyram 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.
Decreased body weight and liver effects were the common and
frequent findings in the fluopyram subchronic and chronic oral toxicity
studies in rats, mice, and dogs, and they appeared to be the most
sensitive effects. Liver effects were characterized by increased liver
weight, hepatocellular hypertrophy, hepatocellular vacuolation,
increased mitosis and hepatocellular necrosis. In the carcinogenicity
study, increased liver tumors were also observed in female rats. Liver
effects in rodents were seen at lower dose levels than those in the
dogs. Thyroid effects were found at dose levels similar to those that
produced liver effects in rats and mice; these effects consisted of
follicular cell hypertrophy, increased thyroid weight and hyperplasia
at dose levels greater than or equal to 100 milligrams/kilogram/day
(mg/kg/day). Changes in thyroid hormone levels were also seen in a
subchronic toxicity study. In male mice, there was an increased
incidence of thyroid adenomas.
Fluopyram is classified as ``Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans''
and a unit risk, Q1*, of 1.55 x 10-2 (mg/kg/
day)-1 was used for the linear low dose extrapolation of
cancer risk based on liver tumors in female rats; thyroid tumors were
also observed in male mice. Fluopyram is not genotoxic or mutagenic.
Fluopyram is not a developmental toxicant, nor did it adversely
affect reproductive parameters. No evidence of qualitative or
quantitative susceptibility was observed in developmental studies in
rats and rabbits or in a multigeneration study in rats.
In an acute neurotoxicity study, transient decreased motor activity
was seen only on the day of treatment, but no other findings
demonstrating neurotoxicity were observed. In addition, no
neurotoxicity was observed in the subchronic neurotoxicity study in the
presence of other systemic adverse effects. Fluopyram did not produce
treatment-related effects on the immune system.
Fluopyram has low acute toxicity via the oral, dermal and
inhalation routes of exposure. Fluopyram is not a skin or eye irritant
or sensitizer under the conditions of the murine lymph node assay.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by fluopyram 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 ``Fluopyram: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Uses on Apples, Bananas (Import only), Cherries
(Sweet and Tart), Dried Beans, Peanuts, Potatoes, Strawberries, Sugar
Beets, Tree Nuts, Watermelon, and Wine Grapes'' beginning at Appendix
A, pages 41-47 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0364.
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.
The details for selecting toxicity endpoints and points of
departure for various exposure scenarios can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in the document ``Fluopyram: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Uses on Apples, Bananas (Import only), Cherries
(Sweet and Tart), Dried Beans, Peanuts, Potatoes, Strawberries, Sugar
Beets, Tree Nuts, Watermelon, and Wine Grapes'' in Appendix A on pages
47-66 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0364.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for fluopyram used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Fluopyram for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RfD, PAD, Level of Study and
Exposure/scenario Point of departure Uncertainty/ FQPA concern for risk toxicological
safety factors assessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute Dietary (General NOAEL= 50 mg/kg/ UFA= 10X.......... aRfD = 0.50 mg/kg/ Acute
Population, including Infants day. UFH=10X........... day. Neurotoxicity
and Children). FQPA SF=1X........ aPAD = 0.50 mg/kg/ Study in Rats.
day. The LOAEL of 100
mg/kg in females
is based on
decreased motor
and locomotor
activity in
females.
The LOAEL in males
was 125 mg/kg/
day.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 10971]]
Acute Dietary (Females 13-49 An endpoint attributable to a single dose exposure has not been identified for
years of age). this subpopulation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic Dietary (All NOAEL= 1.2 mg/kg/ UFA= 10X.......... cRfD = 0.012 mg/kg/ Combined Chronic/
Populations). day. UFH=.............. day. Carcinogenicity
10X............... cPAD = 0.012 mg/kg/ in Rats.
FQPA SF=1X........ day. The LOAEL of 6.0
mg/kg/day is
based on
follicular cell
hypertrophy in
the thyroid, and
increased liver
weight with gross
pathological and
histopathological
findings.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (oral, dermal, Based on the liver tumor in female rats, EPA classified fluopyram as a
inhalation). ``Likely to be Carcinogenic to Human'' and recommended the use of linear low
dose extrapolation model for risk assessment using a unit risk, Q1* = 1.55 x
10-2 (mg/kg/day)-1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is derived from observed dose-response data
and used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally
relevant human exposures. NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect
level. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential
variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor.
PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose (a = acute, c = chronic). mg/kg/
day = milligrams/kilogram/day.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to fluopyram, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances. EPA assessed dietary exposures from fluopyram 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 fluopyram. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food
consumption information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
1994-1996 and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by
Individuals (CSFII). The acute dietary analysis included tolerance
residue levels, 100% crop treated assumption and processing factors
(empirical and default).
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 CSFII. The chronic dietary analysis included average residue
levels from crop field trials, 100% crop treated assumption, and
processing factors (empirical and default).
iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether quantitative cancer exposure
and risk assessments are appropriate for a food-use pesticide based on
the weight of the evidence from cancer studies and other relevant data.
If quantitative cancer risk assessment is appropriate, cancer risk may
be quantified using a linear or nonlinear approach. If sufficient
information on the carcinogenic mode of action is available, a
threshold or non-linear approach is used and a cancer RfD is calculated
based on an earlier noncancer key event. If carcinogenic mode of action
data are not available, or if the mode of action data determines a
mutagenic mode of action, a default linear cancer slope factor approach
is utilized. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that fluopyram should be classified as ``Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans'' and a linear approach has been used to
quantify cancer risk. The cancer dietary analysis included average
residue levels from crop field trials, processing factors (empirical
and default, commercial and household), and percent crop treated (PCT)
estimates.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA used tolerance
level residues and assumed 100% crop treated in the acute dietary
assessment for fluopyram. For the chronic dietary assessment, EPA used
average residues from field trials and 100% CT information. The cancer
dietary risk assessment used average residues from field trials and
projected percent crop treated estimates based on processing factors.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data
and information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues
in food and the actual levels of pesticide residues that have been
measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must require
pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after
the tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect,
demonstrating that the levels in food are not above the levels
anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to be submitted no later
than 5 years from the date of issuance of these tolerances.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary
risk only if:
Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a
valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop
is likely to contain the pesticide residue.
Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
Condition c: Data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area.
In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any
estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate
of PCT as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require
registrants to submit data on PCT.
The Agency estimated the PCT for new uses as follows:
[[Page 10972]]
Almonds: 33%; apples: 40%; barley: 22%; dry beans: 7%; cherry: 49%;
cotton: 7%; grapes: 79%; oats: 23%; peanuts: 67%; potatoes: 64%;
rapeseed: 73%; rye: 63%; sorghum: 12%; soybeans: 1%; strawberries: 71%;
sugar beets: 48%; watermelon: 54%; and wheat: 1%.
EPA's estimate of the percent crop treated for the new uses of
fluopyram represents the upper bound of use expected during the
pesticide's initial 5 years of registration; that is, the percent crop
treated for fluopyram is a threshold of use that EPA is reasonably
certain will not be exceeded for this registered use site. The percent
crop treated for use in the chronic dietary assessment is calculated as
the average percent crop treated of the market leader or leaders (i.e.,
the pesticides with the greatest percent crop treated) on that crop
over the 3 most recent years of available data. The percent crop
treated for use in the acute dietary assessment is the maximum observed
percent crop treated over the same period. Comparisons are only made
among pesticides of the same pesticide types (e .g., the market leader
for fungicides on the use crop is selected for comparison with a new
fungicide). The market leader included in the estimation may not be the
same for each year since different pesticides may dominate at different
times.
To calculate these percent crop treated values, EPA used recent
data from the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) 2002-
2006, and recent proprietary data (2006-2010). The estimates for the
primary crops are based on the market leader approach involving several
registered fungicides, and the estimates for the rotational crops are
based on acres of wheat, corn, sorghum, barley, oats, rye, millet,
soybeans, canola, cotton, and alfalfa grown relative to the total
acreage of dry beans and potatoes treated with fluopyram.
The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed in Unit
III.C.1.iv. have been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates
are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are
reliable and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that
the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an
underestimation. As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption
information and consumption information for significant subpopulations
is taken into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating
the exposure of significant subpopulations including several regional
groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment
process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency
to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than
the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does
not have available reliable information on the regional consumption of
food to which fluopyram may be applied in a particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for fluopyram in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of fluopyram. 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.
Environmental fate studies indicate that the parent fluopyram is
stable under environmental conditions. Reported half-lives range from
89 days in field and aqueous photolysis studies to >1,000 days in
aerobic/anaerobic water/sediment systems. Fluopyram is mobile in soil
and can therefore, be expected to occur in surface water runoff and/or
in ground water leachate. Upper-bound ground water estimates were
derived using the Tier I Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) model. Surface water estimates were partially refined by
incorporating a foliar degradation rate into the Tier II Pesticide Root
Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS) model. The
foliar decay rate was calculated from field trial studies in which
residues were determined at various intervals following foliar
application; no rain or irrigation occurring during the study period.
All other inputs reflect high-end assumptions regarding application
rates and percent cropped area (PCA) in the watershed.
Based on the Tier II PRZM/EXAMS and SCI-GROW models the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of fluopyram for acute exposures
are 13 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.32 ppb for
ground water. The EDWCs of fluopyram for chronic exposures for non-
cancer assessments are estimated to be 4.9 ppb for surface water and
0.32 ppb for ground water and the EDWCs of fluopyram chronic exposures
for cancer assessments are estimated to be 3.5 ppb for surface water
and 0.32 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 13 ppb (1 in 10 year annual
peak) based on a maximum application rate of 0.446 lb ai/A/season
(cucumber) was used to access the contribution to drinking water. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration of value 4.9
ppb (1 in 10 year annual mean) based on a maximum application rate of
0.356 lb active ingredient/Acre (a.i./A)/season (potato) was used to
access the contribution to drinking water. For cancer dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 3.5 ppb (1 in 30 year
annual mean) based on a maximum application rate of 0.356 lb a.i./A/
season (potato) was used to access the contribution of 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). Fluopyram 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 fluopyram
to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and
fluopyram does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore,
EPA has assumed that fluopyram does not have a common mechanism of
toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts
to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to
evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site
at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
[[Page 10973]]
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The available developmental
toxicity studies in rats and rabbits and the multi-generation
reproduction in rats demonstrate no evidence of increased
susceptibility in the developing or young animals which were exposed
during prenatal or postnatal periods. Decreased fetal body weight was
observed at levels equal to or greater than the maternal LOAEL in both
rat and rabbit developmental studies. Likewise, body weight effects
were seen in offspring at levels equal to the parental LOAEL in the rat
2-generation reproductive toxicity study.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for fluopyram is complete and includes the
immunotoxicity study and neurotoxicity screening battery.
ii. The fluopyram toxicology database did not demonstrate evidence
of neurotoxicity. Although transient decreases in motor and locomotor
activities in the acute neurotoxicity study on the day of treatment and
limited use of hind-limbs and reduced motor activity in the rat
chronic/carcinogenicity study were seen, there were no other associated
neurobehavioral or histopathology changes found in other studies in the
fluopyram toxicity database. The effects seen in the chronic/
carcinogenicity study were in the presence of increased mortality and
morbidity such as general pallor and appearance. Therefore, the reduced
motor activity and limited use of hind-limbs seen in these two studies
were judged to be the consequence of the systemic effects and not
direct neurotoxicity. There is no indication that fluopyram is a
neurotoxic chemical and there is no need for a developmental
neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that fluopyram results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the multi-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties in the exposure database.
Although extended field rotational crop studies are required as a
condition of registration, the rotational crop tolerances used in the
dietary risk assessment are not expected to underestimate exposure
because they are based on crop residue results from direct foliar
treatment as opposed to residues taken up by plants through roots from
treated soil. The acute dietary exposure assessment was performed using
tolerance level residues for all crops whereas the chronic dietary
assessment included average field trial residue levels for all crops.
Both acute and chronic assessments assumed 100% crop treated and
incorporated empirical or default processing factors. The dietary
exposure assessment also assumed that all drinking water will contain
fluopyram at the highest EDWC levels modeled by the Agency for ground
or surface water. Residential exposures are not expected. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water
modeling used to assess exposure to fluopyram in drinking water. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
fluopyram.
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 fluopyram will occupy 8.8% of the aPAD for children 1 to 2 years
old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
fluopyram from food and water will utilize 13% of the cPAD for children
1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
There are no residential uses for fluopyram.
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). Because no
short-term adverse effect was identified; fluopyram is not expected to
pose a short-term risk.
A short-term adverse effect was identified; however, fluopyram 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 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
fluopyram.
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). Because no intermediate-term effect was identified, fluopyram
is not expected to pose an intermediate-term risk. An intermediate-term
adverse effect was identified; however, fluopyram 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 short-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 fluopyram.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for the cancer risk assessment, EPA
has concluded that exposure to fluopyram from food and water will
result in a lifetime cancer risk of 2.9 x 10-6 for the
general U.S. population. EPA generally considers cancer risks in the
range of 1 in 1 million (1 x 10-6) or less to be negligible.
The precision which can be assumed for cancer risk estimates is best
described by rounding to the nearest integral order of magnitude on the
log scale; for example, risks falling between
[[Page 10974]]
3 x 10-7 and 3 x 10-6 are expressed as risks in
the range of 10-6. Considering the precision with which
cancer hazard can be estimated, the conservativeness of low-dose linear
extrapolation, and the rounding procedure described above, cancer risk
should generally not be assumed to exceed the benchmark level of
concern of the range of 10-6 until the calculated risk
exceeds approximately 3 x 10-6. This is particularly the
case where some conservatism is maintained in the exposure assessment.
Although the fluopyram exposure risk assessment is refined, it
retains some conservatism due, among other things, to the use of field
trial data to estimate residues in food and the use of high-end
assumptions to estimate residues in water. Accordingly, EPA has
concluded the cancer risk from aggregate exposure to fluopyram falls
within the range of 1 x 10-6 and is thus negligible.
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 fluopyram residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
The German multiresidue method DFG Method S 19, a gas
chromatography with mass selective detection (GC/MSD) method, has been
proposed for the enforcement of tolerances for fluopyram residues in or
on crop commodities, and a high performance liquid chromatography
method with tandem mass spectrometry detection (HPLC/MS/MS), Method
01079, has been proposed for the enforcement of tolerances for residues
of fluopyram and its metabolite, AE C656948-benzamide, in livestock
commodities. The validated limit of quantitation (LOQ) is 0.01 ppm for
each analyte in each matrix. The proposed enforcement method for plant
commodities (DFG Method S19) and livestock commodities (Method 01079)
are deemed adequate as enforcement methods. Adequate HPLC/MS/MS methods
were used for data collection for crop and livestock commodities. The
FDA multiresidue methods of PAM Vol. I are suitable for the
determination of fluopyram in non-fatty matrices (using Section 302),
but are not suitable for detection of AE C656948-benzamide residues.
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.
Codex Maximum Residue Limits (CXLs) have been established for grape
at 2 ppm and dried grapes (raisins) at 5 ppm; milk at 0.07 ppm;
mammalian meat at 0.1 ppm, and edible offal mammalian (meat byproducts)
at 0.7 ppm. For the purpose of international harmonization, EPA is
establishing U.S. tolerances for wine grape at 2.0 ppm (raised from 1.4
ppm); milk at 0.07 ppm (raised from 0.06 ppm); and hog meat byproducts
at 0.70 ppm (raised from 0.45 ppm).
The Codex MRL for grapes is based on field trials conducted in
Europe, and is calculated by rounding up of the statistically
determined 1.3 ppm to 2 ppm. A U.S. tolerance for dried grapes
(raisins) is not needed as the tolerance request is for wine-type
grapes only, which are not converted to raisins.
Harmonization of recommended U.S. tolerances for meat and meat
byproducts (other than hog) with Codex MRLs cannot be achieved. The
Codex MRL for livestock is calculated on the basis of the diets listed
in Annex 6 of the 2009 JMPR Report (OECD Feedstuffs Derived from Field
Crops) and the use of a reasonable worst case diet/feed approach
(RWCF). The dietary burden was calculated using only grape pomace
residue and 20% contribution to the Australian dairy and beef cattle
diets. The U.S. tolerance was based on guidance ``Revisions of
Feedstuffs in (Table 1) OPPTS Test Guideline 860.1000'' and ``Guidance
on Constructing Maximum Reasonably Balanced Diets (MRBD)''. Based on
the U.S. livestock diets (which does not include grape pomace) and the
cattle feeding study, the meat byproduct (cattle, goat horse, sheep)
tolerances need to be set at 1.1 ppm, a higher level than the 0.7 Codex
MRL for edible offal. Similarly, the U.S. meat tolerances for these
animals need to be set higher than the Codex MRL (0.15 versus 0.1 ppm).
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
Because the Agency's preliminary risk assessment of fluopyram
determined that aggregate exposure to fluopyram potentially exceeded
safe levels, the petitioner withdrew tolerance proposals and
registration requests for the following crops: Crop Group 1B Root
vegetable; 1C Tuberous and corm vegetable (except potatoes and
sugarbeet); Crop Group 2 Leaves of root and tuberous vegetables, Crop
subgroups 3-07A and B Bulb vegetables; Crop Group 4 Leafy vegetables;
Crop Group 5 Brassica; Crop Group 6A Edible legumes; Crop Group 6B
Succulent beans and peas; Crop Group 6C (part) Dried peas and some
dried beans, (except soybeans); Crop Group 7 Foliage of legume
vegetables; Crop Group 8 Fruiting vegetables; Crop Group 10 Citrus;
Crop Group 11 Pome fruit (except apple); Crop subgroups 13-07A and B
Caneberries and Bushberries; Crop subgroup 13-07F Vine fruit (except
wine grapes); Crop subgroup 13-07G Low growing berries (except
strawberry); Crop Group 15 Cereal Grains (except for rotational
purposes); Crop Group16 Forage Cereals (except for rotational
purposes); Crop Group17 Grasses grown for forage or seed; Crop Group18
Non grass animal feeds; Crop Group19 Herbs and Spices; Crop Group 20
Oilseeds (except canola); Hops; Globe artichoke; Christmas Trees; Turf;
and Ornamentals.
The petitioner subsequently, submitted a revised registration
specifying uses only on the following crops: Apple; banana (no U.S.
registration); bean, dry; beet, sugar, root; cherry (sweet and tart);
grape, wine; nut tree crop group 14; peanut; pistachio; potatoes;
strawberry; and watermelon. Based on the available field trial data,
and NAFTA tolerance calculation procedures, the Agency recommended
appropriate tolerance levels for individual commodities as opposed to
levels proposed for crop groups. However, although the petitioner
proposed a tolerance for ``nut, tree, group 14 (including pistachio)''
at 0.05 ppm, EPA determined that separate tolerances must be
established for the tree nut crop group and pistachio because pistachio
is not at this time included in crop group 14. The available data
indicate that 0.05 ppm is an appropriate level for these tolerances.
[[Page 10975]]
The petitioner has proposed tolerances for combined residues of
fluopyram and AE C656948-benzamide in egg; milk; the fat, meat, and
meat byproducts of poultry; and the fat, liver, meat, and meat
byproducts (except liver) of cattle, goat, hog, horse, and sheep. The
estimated livestock dietary burden and available feeding study data
indicate that most of the proposed tolerances for livestock commodities
are too low. In addition, EPA no longer establishes separate tolerances
for liver (it is accounted for in the meat byproducts of livestock
animals). Based on the NAFTA calculator, the Agency recommended higher
tolerances.
The revised registration permits crop rotation to alfalfa, cotton,
canola, cereal grains (except rice), and soybean with certain
restrictions. However, extensive field rotational crop data for these
crops are not available. In the absence of sufficient rotational crop
data, highly conservative target crop residue data were used for
setting tolerance for rotational crops. The preference was to select an
intermediate level between the confined accumulation/limited field
rotational crop data and primary crop data for the target rotated crops
so as to discourage potential misuse (i.e., direct foliar application)
and provide adequate maximum residue levels for legal uses according to
label instructions. Thus, pending extensive field rotational crop data,
EPA recommends interim rotational crop tolerances be set at half of the
calculated primary crop tolerances with a PBI of 30 days.
In addition, the Agency determined tolerances were not required for
the following petitioned commodities: Beet, sugar, tops; corn, sweet,
kernel plus cob with husk removed; grain, cereal, forage, fodder and
straw, group 16, except rice, aspirated fractions; and soybean hulls,
thus, these tolerances have been removed. Tolerances were not needed
for the following reasons: the tolerance for the commodity corn, sweet,
kernel plus cob with husk removed is covered under grain, cereal, group
15, except rice; Bayer withdrew their requests for tolerances for
grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except rice;
aspirated fractions and soybean, hulls; and the sugar beet top
tolerance was withdrawn because sugar beet tops are no longer
considered a major livestock commodity.
Moreover, EPA is revising certain crop definitions (as proposed)
for the following: almond, hulls; beet, sugar, roots; eggs; grain,
cereal, group 15, except rice and sweet corn. The correct commodity
terminology are almond, hull; beet, sugar, root; egg; and grain,
cereal, group 15, except rice, respectively.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of fluopyram, in
or on multiple commodities as shown in the codified text below.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to petitions 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 2, 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 180.661 is added to subpart C to read as follows:
Sec. 180.661 Fluopyram; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of the
fungicide Fluopyram, N-[2-[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-
pyridinyl]ethyl]-2-(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including its
metabolites and degradates in or on the commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels specified in the table is to be
[[Page 10976]]
determined by measuring only fluopyram in or on the commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almond, hull............................................... 8.0
Apple...................................................... 0.30
Apple, wet pomace.......................................... 0.60
Banana \1\................................................. 1.0
Bean, dry.................................................. 0.09
Beet, sugar, root.......................................... 0.04
Cherry..................................................... 0.60
Grape, wine................................................ 2.0
Nut, tree, group 14........................................ 0.05
Peanut..................................................... 0.02
Pistachio.................................................. 0.05
Potato..................................................... 0.02
Potato, processed potato waste............................. 0.08
Strawberry................................................. 1.5
Watermelon................................................. 1.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no U.S. registrations.
(2) Tolerances are established for residues of the fungicide
fluopyram, N-[2-[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-pyridinyl]ethyl]-2-
(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including its metabolites and degradates.
Compliance with the tolerance levels specified in the table below is to
be determined by measuring only the sum of fluopyram and its
metabolite, 2-(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, calculated as the
stoichiometric equivalent of fluopyram, in or on the commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, fat................................................ 0.11
Cattle, meat............................................... 0.15
Cattle, meat byproducts.................................... 1.1
Egg........................................................ 0.25
Goat, fat.................................................. 0.11
Goat, meat................................................. 0.15
Goat, meat byproducts...................................... 1.1
Hog, fat................................................... 0.05
Hog, meat.................................................. 0.05
Hog, meat byproducts....................................... 0.70
Horse, fat................................................. 0.11
Horse, meat................................................ 0.15
Horse, meat byproducts..................................... 1.1
Milk....................................................... 0.07
Poultry, fat............................................... 0.20
Poultry, meat.............................................. 0.15
Poultry, meat byproducts................................... 0.60
Sheep, fat................................................. 0.11
Sheep, meat................................................ 0.15
Sheep, meat byproducts..................................... 1.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. It is recommended that
tolerances be established for indirect or inadvertent residues of
fungicide fluopyram, N-[2-[3-chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2-
pyridinyl]ethyl]-2-(trifluoromethyl)benzamide, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in the table
below. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified in the table is
to be determined by measuring only fluopyram in or on the commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alfalfa, forage............................................ 0.45
Alfalfa, hay............................................... 1.1
Canola, seed............................................... 1.8
Cotton, gin byproducts..................................... 0.05
Cotton, undelinted seed.................................... 0.01
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except 4.0
rice; forage..............................................
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16, except 7.0
rice; hay, straw and stover...............................
Grain, cereal, group 15, except rice....................... 1.5
Soybean, forage............................................ 4.0
Soybean, hay............................................... 15
Soybean, seed.............................................. 0.10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2012-4321 Filed 2-23-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P