Aspergillus flavus AF36; Amendment to an Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance, 14287-14291 [2012-5769]
Download as PDF
14287
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2B TO SUBPART E OF PART 59—REACTIVITY FACTORS FOR ALIPHATIC HYDROCARBON SOLVENT MIXTURES—
Continued
Bin
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
......
Average
boiling
point*
(degrees F)
>340–460
>340–460
>340–460
>340–460
>460–580
>460–580
>460–580
>460–580
>460–580
Reactivity
factor
(g O3/g VOC)
Criteria
N- & Iso-Alkanes (≥90% and <2% Aromatics) ............................................................................................
Cyclo-Alkanes (≥90% and <2% Aromatics) ................................................................................................
Alkanes (2 to <8% Aromatics) .....................................................................................................................
Alkanes (8 to 22% Aromatics) .....................................................................................................................
Alkanes (<2% Aromatics) ............................................................................................................................
N- & Iso-Alkanes (≥90% and <2% Aromatics) ............................................................................................
Cyclo-Alkanes (≥90% and <2% Aromatics) ................................................................................................
Alkanes (2 to <8% Aromatics) .....................................................................................................................
Alkanes (8 to 22% Aromatics) .....................................................................................................................
0.81
1.01
1.21
1.82
0.57
0.51
0.63
0.88
1.49
* Average Boiling Point = (Initial Boiling Point + Dry Point)/2(b) Aromatic Hydrocarbon Solvents
6. Table 2C to Subpart E of Part 59 is
revised to read as follows:
■
TABLE 2C TO SUBPART E OF PART 59—REACTIVITY FACTORS FOR AROMATIC HYDROCARBON SOLVENT MIXTURES
Bin
21
22
23
24
......
......
......
......
Boiling
range
(degrees F)
280–290
320–350
355–420
450–535
Aromatic
Aromatic
Aromatic
Aromatic
Content
Content
Content
Content
(≥98%)
(≥98%)
(≥98%)
(≥98%)
[FR Doc. 2012–5648 Filed 3–8–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0158; FRL–9341–5]
Aspergillus flavus AF36; Amendment
to an Exemption From the
Requirement of a Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation amends the
existing temporary tolerance exemption
for Aspergillus flavus AF36 by
establishing a permanent exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of the microbial pesticide,
Aspergillus flavus AF36, in or on
pistachio when applied as an antifungal
agent and used in accordance with good
agricultural practices. On behalf of the
Arizona Cotton Research and Protection
Council, Interregional Research Project
Number 4 submitted a petition to EPA
under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting that
EPA amend an existing temporary
tolerance exemption for Aspergillus
flavus AF36. This regulation eliminates
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Reactivity
factor
(g O3/g VOC)
Criteria
15:10 Mar 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
............................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................
the need to establish a maximum
permissible level for residues of
Aspergillus flavus AF36 under the
FFDCA.
DATES: This regulation is effective
March 9, 2012. Objections and requests
for hearings must be received on or
before May 8, 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 established a docket
for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2007–0158. 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 Office of
Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory
Public Docket in Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
7.37
7.51
8.07
5.00
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:
Jeannine Kausch, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P),
Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 347–8920; email address: kausch.
jeannine@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:
• 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 provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
14288
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
through the Government Printing
Office’s e-CFR site at https://ecfr.
gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=
ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.
tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g),
21 U.S.C. 346a(g), 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–2007–0158 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 May 8, 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–2007–0158, by one of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: OPP Regulatory Public Docket
(7502P), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket
Facility’s normal hours of operation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:10 Mar 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
(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. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of April 20,
2011 (76 FR 22067) (FRL–8869–7), EPA
issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA
section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3),
announcing the filing of a pesticide
tolerance petition (PP 1E7830) by
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4), Rutgers University, 500 College
Rd. East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ
08540 (on behalf of the Arizona Cotton
Research and Protection Council, 3721
East Wier Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85040–
2933). The petition requested that
40 CFR 180.1206 be amended by
establishing a permanent exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of Aspergillus flavus AF36 in
or on pistachio. This notice referenced
a summary of the petition prepared by
the petitioner, IR–4 (on behalf of the
Arizona Cotton Research and Protection
Council), which is available in the
docket via https://www.regulations.gov.
There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish an exemption
from the requirement for a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the exemption is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(c)(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. Pursuant to
FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), in
establishing or maintaining in effect an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance, EPA must take into account
the factors set forth in FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(C), which require EPA to give
special consideration to exposure of
infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance exemption 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 * * *.’’ Additionally,
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D) requires
that EPA consider ‘‘available
information concerning the cumulative
effects of [a particular pesticide’s] * * *
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
residues and other substances that have
a common mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA performs a number of analyses to
determine the risks from aggregate
exposure to pesticide residues. First,
EPA determines the toxicity of
pesticides. Second, EPA examines
exposure to the pesticide through food,
drinking water, and through other
exposures that occur as a result of
pesticide use in residential settings.
III. Toxicological Profile
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D), EPA reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant
information in support of this action
and considered its validity,
completeness and reliability, and the
relationship of this information to
human risk. EPA also considered
available information concerning the
variability of the sensitivities of major
identifiable subgroups of consumers,
including infants and children.
The nature and toxicological profile of
Aspergillus flavus AF36, a nonaflatoxin-producing strain of Aspergillus
flavus, was described extensively in the
Federal Register of July 14, 2003 (68 FR
41535) (FRL–7311–6). ‘‘Those health
effects data were the basis for
establishing the tolerance exemption for
Aspergillus flavus AF36 in or on cotton
(see the Federal Register of July 14,
2003) and corn (see the Federal Register
of March 23, 2011 (76 FR 16297) (FRL–
8868–7)) and their food/feed
commodities and also for temporary
tolerance exemptions for experimental
use of Aspergillus flavus AF36 on
pistachio (see the Federal Register of
May 23, 2007 (72 FR 28868) (FRL–8129–
4)) and on corn (see the Federal Register
of December 26, 2007 (72 FR 72693)
(FRL–8342–1)).’’ The petitioner has now
requested that EPA establish a
permanent exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues
of Aspergillus flavus AF36 in or on
pistachio by amending 40 CFR
180.1206. EPA reviewed the available
data and information in support of this
particular action.
Aspergillus flavus AF36 is neither
toxic nor infective via the oral and
pulmonary routes. EPA has determined
that AF36 is practically nontoxic for
acute oral effects and slightly toxic for
acute inhalation effects. This microbial
pesticide has been used for more than
a decade in experimental laboratory and
field trials and in agricultural practice
on cotton in Arizona, California, and
Texas without any reports of adverse
dermal irritation or hypersensitivity
effects. Based on the comprehensive
toxicological evaluations set forth in
earlier actions establishing tolerance
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
exemptions for Aspergillus flavus AF36
in or on cotton (see the Federal Register
of July 14, 2003) and corn (see the
Federal Register of March 23, 2011)
(also, see Ref. 1), EPA concludes that
there are no toxicological endpoints of
concern for Aspergillus flavus AF36.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
IV. Aggregate Exposure
In examining aggregate exposure,
FFDCA section 408 directs EPA to
consider available information
concerning exposures from the pesticide
residue in food and all other nonoccupational exposures, including
drinking water from ground water or
surface water and exposure through
pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or
buildings (residential and other indoor
uses).
A. Dietary Exposure
1. Food exposure. Current uses of
Aspergillus flavus AF36 include use in
or on cotton and corn. Use on pistachios
was also permitted under Experimental
Use Permit No. 71693–EUP–1, which
expired on December 31, 2011. EPA
previously evaluated exposure to
residues of Aspergillus flavus AF36
through food, resulting from this
microbial pesticide’s use as an
antifungal agent in or on cotton and
corn, in the Federal Register of July 14,
2003 and March 23, 2011. Overall, EPA
concluded that human food exposure
was not expected with Aspergillus
flavus AF36’s cotton use and was
expected (although likely not above
Aspergillus flavus background levels)
with Aspergillus flavus AF36’s corn use.
As a microbial pesticide for use on
pistachio, Aspergillus flavus AF36 is
intended for a single broadcast soil
application from late May to early July.
Once applied to pistachio and after
exposure to moisture, Aspergillus flavus
AF36 germinates, using the carrier upon
which it is placed as a nutrient source,
and displaces aflatoxin-producing
strains of Aspergillus flavus (Ref. 2).
Further, multiple-year studies, which
monitored air and soil populations of
Aspergillus flavus, including strain
AF36, in untreated and treated cotton
fields, demonstrated replacement of the
naturally occurring aflatoxin-producing
Aspergillus flavus with Aspergillus
flavus AF36 without an increase in the
total population of Aspergillus flavus
beyond normal background levels (Refs.
3 and 4). Although residues from the
use of pesticides containing Aspergillus
flavus AF36 may be present on
pistachios at the time of harvest,
commodity processing procedures (e.g.,
roasting and shelling) may further
reduce residues of Aspergillus flavus
AF36 (Ref. 5).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:10 Mar 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
Should this microbial pesticide be
present on food as a result of the cotton,
corn, and/or pistachio uses, the results
of an acute oral toxicity and
pathogenicity study (see Unit III. of the
Federal Register of July 14, 2003, as
well as Ref. 1) demonstrated that no
toxicity, pathogenicity, and/or
infectivity is likely to occur with any
exposure level of Aspergillus flavus
AF36 resulting from application as an
antifungal agent in accordance with
good agricultural practices.
2. Drinking water exposure. Similar to
the drinking water exposure scenarios
described for Aspergillus flavus AF36’s
cotton and corn uses (see the Federal
Register of July 14, 2003 and March 23,
2011) exposure to residues of this
microbial pesticide in consumed
drinking water, resulting from pesticidal
use in or on pistachio, is possible but
not likely to be greater than current/
existing exposures to Aspergillus flavus
strains, which are already present in the
environment. Pistachio is grown in an
arid environment, which minimizes the
potential for transfer of Aspergillus
flavus AF36 to surface or ground waters
that may be used as sources of drinking
water. Moreover, the pesticide is
applied only once per growing season at
a low rate to non-aquatic sites, and
offsite movement is not anticipated
since the pesticide is in a granular form.
If Aspergillus flavus AF36 were to be
transferred to surface or ground waters
(e.g., through runoff) that are intended
for eventual human consumption and
directed to wastewater treatment
systems or drinking water facilities, this
soilborne fungus may not survive some
of the conditions water is subjected to
in such systems or facilities, including
chlorination, pH adjustments, and
filtration (Refs. 6 and 7).
Should this microbial pesticide be
present in drinking water (e.g., water
not subject to treatment systems or
facilities) as a result of the cotton, corn,
and/or pistachio uses, the results of an
acute oral toxicity and pathogenicity
study (see Unit III. of the Federal
Register of July 14, 2003, as well as Ref.
1) demonstrated that no toxicity,
pathogenicity, and/or infectivity is
likely to occur with any exposure level
of Aspergillus flavus AF36 resulting
from application as an antifungal agent
in accordance with good agricultural
practices.
B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure
Non-occupational dermal and
inhalation exposure is expected to be
minimal to non-existent for the uses of
Aspergillus flavus AF36 in or on cotton,
corn, and pistachio. As described
previously in the Federal Register of
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
14289
July 14, 2003 and March 23, 2011 for
Aspergillus flavus AF36’s cotton and
corn uses, this antifungal agent is to be
applied to agricultural sites and not in
the proximity of residential areas,
schools, nursing homes, or day care
facilities. Additionally, the Aspergillus
flavus AF36 product to be applied to
cotton, corn, and pistachio is in a
granular form, thereby minimizing drift
even for application methods (e.g.,
aerial) that may be more likely to result
in offsite pesticide movement and
exposure.
V. 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 exemption, EPA 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 Aspergillus flavus
AF36 to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and
Aspergillus flavus AF36 does not appear
to produce a toxic metabolite produced
by other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that Aspergillus flavus AF36
does not have a common mechanism of
toxicity with other substances.
Therefore, section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of
FFDCA does not apply. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to identify
chemicals that may 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.
VI. Determination of Safety for U.S.
Population, Infants and Children
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) provides
that, in considering the establishment of
a tolerance or tolerance exemption for a
pesticide chemical residue, EPA shall
assess the available information about
consumption patterns among infants
and children, special susceptibility of
infants and children to pesticide
chemical residues, and the cumulative
effects on infants and children of the
residues and other substances with a
common mechanism of toxicity. In
addition, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C)
provides that EPA shall apply an
additional tenfold (10X) margin of
exposure (safety) for infants and
children in the case of threshold effects
to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the
database on toxicity and exposure
unless EPA determines that a different
margin of exposure (safety) will be safe
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
14290
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
for infants and children. This additional
margin of exposure (safety) is commonly
referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor. In
applying this provision, EPA either
retains the default value of 10X or uses
a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support
the choice of a different factor.
In this instance, based on all the
available information, EPA concludes
that there are no threshold effects of
concern to infants, children, or adults
when Aspergillus flavus AF36 is used as
labeled in accordance with good
agricultural practices. As a result, EPA
concludes that no additional margin of
exposure (safety) is necessary to protect
infants and children and that not adding
any additional margin of exposure
(safety) will be safe for infants and
children.
Moreover, based on the same data and
EPA analysis as presented in this unit,
the Agency is able to conclude that
there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result to the U.S. population,
including infants and children, from
aggregate exposure to the residues of
Aspergillus flavus AF36 when it is used
as labeled and in accordance with good
agricultural practices as an antifungal
agent. Such exposure includes all
anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information. As discussed
previously, there appears to be no
potential for harm from this fungus in
its use as an antifungal agent via dietary
exposure since the microorganism is
non-toxic and non-pathogenic to
animals and humans. EPA arrived at
this conclusion based on the very low
levels of mammalian toxicity for acute
oral and pulmonary effects with no
toxicity or infectivity at the doses tested
(see Unit III. of this document).
VII. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An analytical method is not required
for enforcement purposes for the
reasons stated in this document and
because EPA is establishing an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical
limitation.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. In this context, EPA considers
the international maximum residue
limits (MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:10 Mar 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established a MRL
for Aspergillus flavus AF36.
VIII. Conclusions
EPA concludes that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to the U.S. population, including
infants and children, from aggregate
exposure to residues of Aspergillus
flavus AF36. Therefore, the existing
temporary tolerance exemption for
Aspergillus flavus AF36 is amended by
establishing a permanent exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of Aspergillus flavus AF36 in
or on pistachio when applied as an
antifungal agent and used in accordance
with good agricultural practices.
IX. References
1. U.S. EPA. 2003a. Aspergillus flavus AF36
Biopesticides Registration Action
Document (Dated July 3, 2003). Available
from https://www.epa.gov/oppbppd1/
biopesticides/ingredients/tech_docs/
brad_006456.pdf.
2. U.S. EPA. 2011. Aspergillus flavus AF36
use on pistachio. Memorandum from J.V.
Gagliardi, Ph.D. and J.L. Kough, Ph.D. to
S. Bacchus dated September 29, 2011.
3. U.S. EPA. 2003b. Environmental Hazard
Assessment for the Microbial Pesticide,
Aspergillus flavus AF36 for Conditional
Registration in Arizona and EUP
Extension in Texas. Memorandum from
G.S. Tomimatsu, Ph.D. and Z. Vaituzis,
Ph.D. to S. Bacchus dated May 16, 2003.
Available from
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/chemical/
foia/cleared-reviews/reviews/006456/
006456-2003-05-16a.pdf.
4. U.S. EPA. 2003c. BPPD Review of Soil and
Air Monitoring Studies and Product
Performance Testing (Efficacy)
Submitted by USDA Southern Regional
Research Center/IR–4 as a Condition of
Registration and EUP Extension (Texas)
for Aspergillus flavus AF36.
Memorandum from G.S. Tomimatsu,
Ph.D. and J. Kough, Ph.D. to S. Bacchus
dated May 15, 2003. Available from
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/chemical/
foia/cleared-reviews/reviews/006456/
006456-2003-05-15a.pdf.
5. U.S. EPA. 1996. Microbial Pesticide Test
Guidelines—Background for Residue
Analysis of Microbial Pest Control
Agents (OPPTS 885.2000). Available
from https://www.epa.gov/ocspp/pubs/
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
frs/publications/Test_Guidelines/
series885.htm.
6. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. 2009. Drinking Water—
Water Treatment. Available from https://
www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/
public/water_treatment.html.
7. U.S. EPA. 2004. Primer for Municipal
Wastewater Treatment Systems. EPA
832–R–04–001. Available from https://
www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/primer.pdf.
X. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule amends a tolerance
exemption under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition
submitted to EPA. 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 amended on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance exemption 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.
As a result, this action does not alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such,
EPA 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
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, EPA 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
EPA 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).
XI. 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 29, 2012.
Keith A. Matthews,
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution
Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.1206 is amended by
revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
§ 180.1206 Aspergillus flavus AF36;
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) An exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance is established
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:10 Mar 08, 2012
Jkt 226001
for residues of Aspergillus flavus AF36
in or on pistachio when applied as an
antifungal agent and used in accordance
with good agricultural practices.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2012–5769 Filed 3–8–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
14291
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (703) 308–8050; email address:
maignan.tawanda@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0349; FRL–9335–7]
Penthiopyrad; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of penthiopyrad
in or on multiple commodities which
are identified and discussed later in this
document. Mitsui Chemical Agro, Inc.
c/o Landis International Inc. requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
March 9, 2012. Objections and requests
for hearings must be received on or
before May 8, 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).
SUMMARY:
EPA has established a
docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2010–0349. 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:
Tawanda Maignan, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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–2010–0349 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
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 47 (Friday, March 9, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14287-14291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5769]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0158; FRL-9341-5]
Aspergillus flavus AF36; Amendment to an Exemption From the
Requirement of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation amends the existing temporary tolerance
exemption for Aspergillus flavus AF36 by establishing a permanent
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the
microbial pesticide, Aspergillus flavus AF36, in or on pistachio when
applied as an antifungal agent and used in accordance with good
agricultural practices. On behalf of the Arizona Cotton Research and
Protection Council, Interregional Research Project Number 4 submitted a
petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
requesting that EPA amend an existing temporary tolerance exemption for
Aspergillus flavus AF36. This regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level for residues of Aspergillus
flavus AF36 under the FFDCA.
DATES: This regulation is effective March 9, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before May 8, 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 established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0158. 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 Office of Pesticide Programs (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: Jeannine Kausch, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (703) 347-8920; email
address: kausch.jeannine@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:
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 provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also
[[Page 14288]]
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 40 CFR
part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a(g), 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-2007-0158 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
May 8, 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-2007-0158, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001.
Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305-5805.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
In the Federal Register of April 20, 2011 (76 FR 22067) (FRL-8869-
7), EPA issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide tolerance petition (PP
1E7830) by Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), Rutgers
University, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540 (on
behalf of the Arizona Cotton Research and Protection Council, 3721 East
Wier Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85040-2933). The petition requested that 40 CFR
180.1206 be amended by establishing a permanent exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of Aspergillus flavus AF36 in
or on pistachio. This notice referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by the petitioner, IR-4 (on behalf of the Arizona Cotton
Research and Protection Council), which is available in the docket via
https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response
to the notice of filing.
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(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. Pursuant to FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), in
establishing or maintaining in effect an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance, EPA must take into account the factors set forth in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C), which require EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance exemption 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 * * *.'' Additionally, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D) requires that
EPA consider ``available information concerning the cumulative effects
of [a particular pesticide's] * * * residues and other substances that
have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the
toxicity of pesticides. Second, EPA examines exposure to the pesticide
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings.
III. Toxicological Profile
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action and considered its validity, completeness and reliability,
and the relationship of this information to human risk. EPA also
considered available information concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
The nature and toxicological profile of Aspergillus flavus AF36, a
non-aflatoxin-producing strain of Aspergillus flavus, was described
extensively in the Federal Register of July 14, 2003 (68 FR 41535)
(FRL-7311-6). ``Those health effects data were the basis for
establishing the tolerance exemption for Aspergillus flavus AF36 in or
on cotton (see the Federal Register of July 14, 2003) and corn (see the
Federal Register of March 23, 2011 (76 FR 16297) (FRL-8868-7)) and
their food/feed commodities and also for temporary tolerance exemptions
for experimental use of Aspergillus flavus AF36 on pistachio (see the
Federal Register of May 23, 2007 (72 FR 28868) (FRL-8129-4)) and on
corn (see the Federal Register of December 26, 2007 (72 FR 72693) (FRL-
8342-1)).'' The petitioner has now requested that EPA establish a
permanent exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of
Aspergillus flavus AF36 in or on pistachio by amending 40 CFR 180.1206.
EPA reviewed the available data and information in support of this
particular action.
Aspergillus flavus AF36 is neither toxic nor infective via the oral
and pulmonary routes. EPA has determined that AF36 is practically
nontoxic for acute oral effects and slightly toxic for acute inhalation
effects. This microbial pesticide has been used for more than a decade
in experimental laboratory and field trials and in agricultural
practice on cotton in Arizona, California, and Texas without any
reports of adverse dermal irritation or hypersensitivity effects. Based
on the comprehensive toxicological evaluations set forth in earlier
actions establishing tolerance
[[Page 14289]]
exemptions for Aspergillus flavus AF36 in or on cotton (see the Federal
Register of July 14, 2003) and corn (see the Federal Register of March
23, 2011) (also, see Ref. 1), EPA concludes that there are no
toxicological endpoints of concern for Aspergillus flavus AF36.
IV. Aggregate Exposure
In examining aggregate exposure, FFDCA section 408 directs EPA to
consider available information concerning exposures from the pesticide
residue in food and all other non-occupational exposures, including
drinking water from ground water or surface water and exposure through
pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or buildings (residential and other
indoor uses).
A. Dietary Exposure
1. Food exposure. Current uses of Aspergillus flavus AF36 include
use in or on cotton and corn. Use on pistachios was also permitted
under Experimental Use Permit No. 71693-EUP-1, which expired on
December 31, 2011. EPA previously evaluated exposure to residues of
Aspergillus flavus AF36 through food, resulting from this microbial
pesticide's use as an antifungal agent in or on cotton and corn, in the
Federal Register of July 14, 2003 and March 23, 2011. Overall, EPA
concluded that human food exposure was not expected with Aspergillus
flavus AF36's cotton use and was expected (although likely not above
Aspergillus flavus background levels) with Aspergillus flavus AF36's
corn use.
As a microbial pesticide for use on pistachio, Aspergillus flavus
AF36 is intended for a single broadcast soil application from late May
to early July. Once applied to pistachio and after exposure to
moisture, Aspergillus flavus AF36 germinates, using the carrier upon
which it is placed as a nutrient source, and displaces aflatoxin-
producing strains of Aspergillus flavus (Ref. 2). Further, multiple-
year studies, which monitored air and soil populations of Aspergillus
flavus, including strain AF36, in untreated and treated cotton fields,
demonstrated replacement of the naturally occurring aflatoxin-producing
Aspergillus flavus with Aspergillus flavus AF36 without an increase in
the total population of Aspergillus flavus beyond normal background
levels (Refs. 3 and 4). Although residues from the use of pesticides
containing Aspergillus flavus AF36 may be present on pistachios at the
time of harvest, commodity processing procedures (e.g., roasting and
shelling) may further reduce residues of Aspergillus flavus AF36 (Ref.
5).
Should this microbial pesticide be present on food as a result of
the cotton, corn, and/or pistachio uses, the results of an acute oral
toxicity and pathogenicity study (see Unit III. of the Federal Register
of July 14, 2003, as well as Ref. 1) demonstrated that no toxicity,
pathogenicity, and/or infectivity is likely to occur with any exposure
level of Aspergillus flavus AF36 resulting from application as an
antifungal agent in accordance with good agricultural practices.
2. Drinking water exposure. Similar to the drinking water exposure
scenarios described for Aspergillus flavus AF36's cotton and corn uses
(see the Federal Register of July 14, 2003 and March 23, 2011) exposure
to residues of this microbial pesticide in consumed drinking water,
resulting from pesticidal use in or on pistachio, is possible but not
likely to be greater than current/existing exposures to Aspergillus
flavus strains, which are already present in the environment. Pistachio
is grown in an arid environment, which minimizes the potential for
transfer of Aspergillus flavus AF36 to surface or ground waters that
may be used as sources of drinking water. Moreover, the pesticide is
applied only once per growing season at a low rate to non-aquatic
sites, and offsite movement is not anticipated since the pesticide is
in a granular form. If Aspergillus flavus AF36 were to be transferred
to surface or ground waters (e.g., through runoff) that are intended
for eventual human consumption and directed to wastewater treatment
systems or drinking water facilities, this soilborne fungus may not
survive some of the conditions water is subjected to in such systems or
facilities, including chlorination, pH adjustments, and filtration
(Refs. 6 and 7).
Should this microbial pesticide be present in drinking water (e.g.,
water not subject to treatment systems or facilities) as a result of
the cotton, corn, and/or pistachio uses, the results of an acute oral
toxicity and pathogenicity study (see Unit III. of the Federal Register
of July 14, 2003, as well as Ref. 1) demonstrated that no toxicity,
pathogenicity, and/or infectivity is likely to occur with any exposure
level of Aspergillus flavus AF36 resulting from application as an
antifungal agent in accordance with good agricultural practices.
B. Other Non-Occupational Exposure
Non-occupational dermal and inhalation exposure is expected to be
minimal to non-existent for the uses of Aspergillus flavus AF36 in or
on cotton, corn, and pistachio. As described previously in the Federal
Register of July 14, 2003 and March 23, 2011 for Aspergillus flavus
AF36's cotton and corn uses, this antifungal agent is to be applied to
agricultural sites and not in the proximity of residential areas,
schools, nursing homes, or day care facilities. Additionally, the
Aspergillus flavus AF36 product to be applied to cotton, corn, and
pistachio is in a granular form, thereby minimizing drift even for
application methods (e.g., aerial) that may be more likely to result in
offsite pesticide movement and exposure.
V. 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 exemption, EPA
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 Aspergillus flavus AF36 to share a common
mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and Aspergillus flavus
AF36 does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA
has assumed that Aspergillus flavus AF36 does not have a common
mechanism of toxicity with other substances. Therefore, section
408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA does not apply. For information regarding
EPA's efforts to identify chemicals that may 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.
VI. Determination of Safety for U.S. Population, Infants and Children
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) provides that, in considering the
establishment of a tolerance or tolerance exemption for a pesticide
chemical residue, EPA shall assess the available information about
consumption patterns among infants and children, special susceptibility
of infants and children to pesticide chemical residues, and the
cumulative effects on infants and children of the residues and other
substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. In addition, FFDCA
section 408(b)(2)(C) provides that EPA shall apply an additional
tenfold (10X) margin of exposure (safety) for infants and children in
the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal
toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and exposure
unless EPA determines that a different margin of exposure (safety) will
be safe
[[Page 14290]]
for infants and children. This additional margin of exposure (safety)
is commonly referred to as the Food Quality Protection Act Safety
Factor. In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X or uses a different additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice of a different factor.
In this instance, based on all the available information, EPA
concludes that there are no threshold effects of concern to infants,
children, or adults when Aspergillus flavus AF36 is used as labeled in
accordance with good agricultural practices. As a result, EPA concludes
that no additional margin of exposure (safety) is necessary to protect
infants and children and that not adding any additional margin of
exposure (safety) will be safe for infants and children.
Moreover, based on the same data and EPA analysis as presented in
this unit, the Agency is able to conclude that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to the U.S. population, including
infants and children, from aggregate exposure to the residues of
Aspergillus flavus AF36 when it is used as labeled and in accordance
with good agricultural practices as an antifungal agent. Such exposure
includes all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information. As discussed previously, there
appears to be no potential for harm from this fungus in its use as an
antifungal agent via dietary exposure since the microorganism is non-
toxic and non-pathogenic to animals and humans. EPA arrived at this
conclusion based on the very low levels of mammalian toxicity for acute
oral and pulmonary effects with no toxicity or infectivity at the doses
tested (see Unit III. of this document).
VII. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes for
the reasons stated in this document and because EPA is establishing an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance without any numerical
limitation.
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. In this
context, 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 United
Nations Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization
food standards program, and it is recognized as an international food
safety standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the
United States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires
that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established a MRL for Aspergillus flavus AF36.
VIII. Conclusions
EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result to the U.S. population, including infants and children,
from aggregate exposure to residues of Aspergillus flavus AF36.
Therefore, the existing temporary tolerance exemption for Aspergillus
flavus AF36 is amended by establishing a permanent exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of Aspergillus flavus AF36 in
or on pistachio when applied as an antifungal agent and used in
accordance with good agricultural practices.
IX. References
1. U.S. EPA. 2003a. Aspergillus flavus AF36 Biopesticides
Registration Action Document (Dated July 3, 2003). Available from
https://www.epa.gov/oppbppd1/biopesticides/ingredients/tech_docs/brad_006456.pdf.
2. U.S. EPA. 2011. Aspergillus flavus AF36 use on pistachio.
Memorandum from J.V. Gagliardi, Ph.D. and J.L. Kough, Ph.D. to S.
Bacchus dated September 29, 2011.
3. U.S. EPA. 2003b. Environmental Hazard Assessment for the
Microbial Pesticide, Aspergillus flavus AF36 for Conditional
Registration in Arizona and EUP Extension in Texas. Memorandum from
G.S. Tomimatsu, Ph.D. and Z. Vaituzis, Ph.D. to S. Bacchus dated May
16, 2003. Available from https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/chemical/foia/cleared-reviews/reviews/006456/006456-2003-05-16a.pdf.
4. U.S. EPA. 2003c. BPPD Review of Soil and Air Monitoring Studies
and Product Performance Testing (Efficacy) Submitted by USDA
Southern Regional Research Center/IR-4 as a Condition of
Registration and EUP Extension (Texas) for Aspergillus flavus AF36.
Memorandum from G.S. Tomimatsu, Ph.D. and J. Kough, Ph.D. to S.
Bacchus dated May 15, 2003. Available from https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/chemical/foia/cleared-reviews/reviews/006456/006456-2003-05-15a.pdf.
5. U.S. EPA. 1996. Microbial Pesticide Test Guidelines--Background
for Residue Analysis of Microbial Pest Control Agents (OPPTS
885.2000). Available from https://www.epa.gov/ocspp/pubs/frs/publications/Test_Guidelines/series885.htm.
6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2009. Drinking
Water--Water Treatment. Available from https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/public/water_treatment.html.
7. U.S. EPA. 2004. Primer for Municipal Wastewater Treatment
Systems. EPA 832-R-04-001. Available from https://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/primer.pdf.
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule amends a tolerance exemption under section 408(d)
of FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to EPA. 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 amended on the basis of a
petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance exemption 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. As a result, this
action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, EPA 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
[[Page 14291]]
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, EPA 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 EPA 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).
XI. 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 29, 2012.
Keith A. Matthews,
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. Section 180.1206 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 180.1206 Aspergillus flavus AF36; exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance.
* * * * *
(b) An exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established
for residues of Aspergillus flavus AF36 in or on pistachio when applied
as an antifungal agent and used in accordance with good agricultural
practices.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-5769 Filed 3-8-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P