S-Metolachlor; Pesticide Tolerances, 48902-48907 [2012-20034]
Download as PDF
48902
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 158 / Wednesday, August 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2012–19987 Filed 8–14–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0657; FRL–9356–9]
S-Metolachlor; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of S-metolachlor
in or on beet, garden, leaves, cilantro,
leaves and coriander, seed. Interregional
Research Project Number 4 requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
August 15, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before October 15, 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: The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0657, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the OPP Docket in the
Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), located in EPA
West, Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and
the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sidney Jackson, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–7610; email address:
jackson.sidney@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:27 Aug 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
not limited to those engaged in the
following activities:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/
text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/
Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2011–0657 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 October 15, 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–2011–0657, by one of
the following methods:
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), Mail Code: 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of September
7, 2011 (76 FR 55329) (FRL–8886–7),
EPA issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA
section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3),
announcing the filing of a pesticide
petition (PP 1E7898) by Interregional
Research Project Number 4, 500 College
Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ
08540. The petition requested that 40
CFR 180.368 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of
the herbicide S-metolachlor, S-2-chloroN-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamide, its
R-enantiomer, and its metabolites,
determined as the derivatives, 2-[2ethyl-6-methylphenyl)amino]-1propanol and 4-[2-ethyl-6methylphenyl)-2-hydroxy-5-methyl-3morpholinone, in or on cilantro, leaves,
fresh at 8.0 parts per million (ppm)
cilantro, leaves, dried at 8.0 ppm,
coriander, seed at 0.13 ppm and beet,
garden, leaves at 1.8 ppm. That notice
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection,
the registrant, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
EPA received one comment to the
Notice of Filing. That comment is
addressed in Unit IV.C.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA corrected
the crop definition for ‘‘cilantro’’ to
‘‘coriander’’ and removed proposed
tolerances for fresh and dried cilantro
leaves. The reasons for these changes
are explained in Unit IV.D.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM
15AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 158 / Wednesday, August 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for S-metolachlor
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with S-metolachlor follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered their
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.
S-Metolachlor exhibits low acute
toxicity via oral, inhalation, and dermal
routes of exposure. It causes slight eye
irritation, and is non-irritating dermally,
but is a dermal sensitizer. In subchronic
(metolachlor and S-metolachlor) and
chronic (metolachlor) toxicity studies in
dogs and rats decreased body weight
and body weight gain were the most
commonly observed effects. No systemic
toxicity was observed when metolachlor
was administered dermally. No
neurotoxicity studies with metolachlor
or S-metolachlor are available. However,
there was no evidence of neurotoxic
effects in the available toxicity studies.
Prenatal developmental studies in the
rat and rabbit with both metolachlor and
S-metolachlor revealed no evidence of a
qualitative or quantitative susceptibility
in fetal animals. A 2-generation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:27 Aug 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
reproduction study with metolachlor in
rats showed no evidence of parental or
reproductive toxicity. There are no
residual uncertainties with regard to
pre- and/or postnatal toxicity.
Metolachlor has been evaluated for
carcinogenic effects in the mouse and
the rat. Metolachlor did not cause an
increase in tumors of any kind in mice.
In rats, metolachlor caused an increase
in benign liver tumors in rats but this
increase was seen only at the highest
dose tested and was statistically
significant compared to controls only in
females. There was no evidence of
mutagenic or cytogenetic effects in vivo
or in vitro. Based on this evidence, EPA
has concluded that metolachlor does not
have a common mechanism of
carcinogenicity with acetochlor and
alachlor which are structurally similar.
Taking into account the qualitatively
weak evidence on carcinogenic effects
and the fact that the increase in benign
tumors in female rats occurs at a dose
1,500 times the chronic reference dose
(cRfD), EPA has concluded that the cRfD
is protective of any potential cancer
effect.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by S-metolachlor 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 document
entitled, ‘‘S-Metolachlor. Human Health
Risk Assessment for the Section 3
Requests for Use on Coriander (Cilantro)
and Garden Beet Leaves,’’ p. 13 in
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–
0657.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
48903
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for S-metolachlor used for
human risk assessment is discussed in
Unit III. of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of September 17,
2010 (75 FR 56899) (FRL–8842–3).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to S-metolachlor, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing metolachlor and S-metolachlor
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368. EPA
assessed dietary exposures from Smetolachlor in food as follows:
Both the acute and chronic analyses
assume tolerance-level residues on all
crops with established, pending, or
proposed tolerances for metolachlor
and/or S-metolachlor. In cases where
separate tolerance listings occur for both
metolachlor and S-metolachlor on the
same commodity, the higher value of
the two is used in the analyses.
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 Smetolachlor. In estimating acute dietary
exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the United States
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA)
Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food
Intake by Individuals (CSFII), 1994–
1996 and 1998. As to residue levels in
food, EPA assumed tolerance level
residues for all uses, 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) for all commodities and
default processing factors.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA’s Nationwide CSFII,
1994–1996 and 1998. As to residue
levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance
level residues for all uses, 100 PCT for
all commodities and default processing
factors.
iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether
quantitative cancer exposure and risk
assessments are appropriate for a food-
E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM
15AUR1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
48904
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 158 / Wednesday, August 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
use pesticide based on the weight of the
evidence from cancer studies and other
relevant data. Cancer risk is quantified
using a linear or nonlinear approach. If
sufficient information on the
carcinogenic mode of action is available,
a threshold or nonlinear 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 determine 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 a nonlinear RfD
approach is appropriate for assessing
cancer risk to S-metolachlor. Cancer risk
was assessed using the same exposure
estimates as discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for S-metolachlor. Tolerance level
residues and 100 PCT were assumed for
all food commodities with existing
tolerances, and default processing
factors.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for S-metolachlor in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of Smetolachlor. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir
Screening Tool (FIRST), Pesticide Root
Zone Model/Exposure Analysis
Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS)
Screening Concentration in Ground
Water (SCI–GROW) models and the
USGA National Water-Quality
Assessment (NAWQA) Program
monitoring data, the Agency calculated
conservative estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) of Smetolachlor and metolachlor originating
from ground water and surface water.
EDWCs for metolachlor and metolachlor
were calculated for both the parent
compound and the ethanesulfonic acid
(ESA) and oxanilic acid (OA)
degradates. The environmental fate data
have been bridged from the racemic
mixture (50:50) of metolachlor to the
newer isomer (88:12) S-metolachlor,
based on similarities in environmental
fate behavior. Tier I and Tier II
screening models were employed for
this assessment. For surface water,
PRZM/EXAMS and FIRST Version1.1.1
models were used to estimate drinking
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:27 Aug 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
water concentrations for the parent Smetolachlor and the ESA and OA
degradates, respectively. The SCI–
GROW model was used to predict the
maximum acute and chronic
concentrations present in shallow
groundwater. Current NAWQA
monitoring data were also used to
determine EDWCs. Based on monitoring
and modeling data, total EDWCs for
peak and average surface water
respectively are 219 ppb (78 ppb parent
+ 48 ppb metolachlor ESA+ 94 ppb
metolachlor OA) and 119 ppb (18 ppb
parent + 34 ppb metolachlor ESA+ 67
ppb metolachlor OA). Groundwater
EDWCs (peak and average) are 126 ppb
(33 ppb parent + 64 ppb metolachlor
ESA+ 30 ppb metolachlor OA).y67
For acute exposures are estimated to
be 219 ppb for surface water and 126
ppb for ground water.
For chronic exposures for non-cancer
assessments are estimated to be 110 ppb
for surface water and 126 ppb for
ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model.
For acute dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration value of 219 ppb
was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water.
For chronic dietary risk assessment
(cancer and non-cancer), the water
concentration of value 126 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
S-Metolachlor is currently registered
for the following uses that could result
in residential exposures: Residential
lawns or turf by professional
applicators. Pennant MAGNUM\TM
(EPA Reg. No. 100–950) is labeled for
use on commercial (sod farm) and
residential warm-season turf grasses and
other non-crop land including golf
courses, sports fields, and ornamental
gardens. Since Pennant MAGNUM\TM
is not registered for homeowner
purchase or use (i.e., used by
professional/commercial applicators),
the only potential short-term residential
risk scenario anticipated is postapplication hand-to-mouth exposure of
children playing on treated lawns. Smetolachlor incidental oral exposure is
assumed to include hand-to-mouth
exposure, object-to-mouth exposure and
exposure through incidental ingestion of
soil. Small children are the population
group of concern. Although the type of
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
site that S-metolachlor may be used on
varies from golf courses to ornamental
gardens, the scenario chosen for risk
assessment (residential turf use)
represents what the Agency considers
the likely upper-end of possible
exposure.
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
Other than metolachlor, EPA has not
found S-metolachlor to share a common
mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and S-metolachlor does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has assumed that Smetolachlor does not have a common
mechanism of toxicity with other
substances.
For information regarding EPA’s
efforts to determine which chemicals
have a common mechanism of toxicity
and to evaluate the cumulative effects of
such chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
No increase in susceptibility was seen
in developmental toxicity studies in rat
and rabbit or reproductive toxicity
studies in the rat. Toxicity to offspring
was observed at dose levels the same or
greater than those causing maternal or
E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM
15AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 158 / Wednesday, August 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
parental toxicity. Based on the results of
developmental and reproductive
toxicity studies, there is not a concern
for increased qualitative and/or
quantitative susceptibility following in
utero exposure to metolachlor or Smetolachlor.
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 Smetolachlor is complete, except for an
immunotoxicity and acute and
subchronic neurotoxicity studies
required under the amendments to the
data requirements. However, based on
the results of the available toxicity
studies, there is no evidence of
immunotoxicity or neurotoxicity. Thus,
EPA does not expect these data to
change the existing POD for risk
assessment.
ii. There is no indication that Smetolachlor 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 Smetolachlor causes an increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100 PCT,
tolerance-level residues for all uses, and
default processing factors. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to Smetolachlor in drinking water. EPA
used similarly conservative assumptions
to assess post-application exposure of
children as well as incidental oral
exposure of toddlers. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by S-metolachlor.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the aPAD and cPAD. For
linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the
lifetime probability of acquiring cancer
given the estimated aggregate exposure.
Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:27 Aug 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to Smetolachlor will occupy 1.5% of the
aPAD for all infants < 1 year 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 S-metolachlor
from food and water will utilize 11.6%
of the cPAD for all infants < 1 year old,
the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the
explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic
residential exposure to residues of Smetolachlor is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
S-metolachlor is currently registered
for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency
has determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with short-term residential
exposures to S-metolachlor. Using the
exposure assumptions described in this
unit for short-term exposures, EPA has
concluded the combined short-term
food, water, and residential exposures
including incidental oral exposure from
all possible sources: Combined hand-tomouth, object-to-mouth, and soil
ingestion oral exposure result in an
aggregate MOE of 860. Because EPA’s
level of concern for S-metolachlor is a
MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are
not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level). An
intermediate-term adverse effect was
identified; however, S-metolachlor 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 PODs used
to assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
48905
evaluating intermediate-term risk for Smetolachlor.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. As explained in Unit III.A.
of this document, EPA has concluded
that the chronic RfD is protective of
cancer effects, and, as shown above, the
chronic risk assessment indicated that
aggregate exposure to S-metolachlor
does not pose a risk of concern.
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 Smetolachlor residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodologies
(gas chromatography with nitrogen
phosphorous detector (GC/NPD) method
(Method I) for determining residues in/
on crop commodities and a gas
chromatography with mass
spectroscopy detector (GC/MSD)
method (Method II) for determining
residues in livestock commodities) are
available to enforce the tolerance
expression. IR–4 and Syngenta have
proposed a high pressure liquid
chromatography with mass
spectroscopy/mass spectroscopy (HPLC/
MS/MS) enantiomer-specific method for
the enforcement of the proposed
tolerances, Method 1848–01. The
method uses a chiral HPLC column to
separate out the S-enantiomers
(SYN506357 and SYN508500) of the
hydrolysis products CGA–37913 and
CGA–49751. This method has been
determined to be adequate for
enforcement purposes.
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
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM
15AUR1
48906
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 158 / Wednesday, August 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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.
Neither Codex, Canada, or Mexico has
established or proposed maximum
residue limits (MRLs) for S-metolachlor
on cilantro or garden beet leaves.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Response to Comments
In the one comment received, the
commenter objected to EPA approving
use of this chemical and asked that EPA
ban further use of this ‘‘toxic chemical.’’
The commenter went on to state that
there are several toxic effects attributed
to this chemical including evidence of
carcinogenicity. The Agency
understands the commenter’s concerns
and recognizes that some individuals
believe that certain pesticide chemicals
should not be permitted in our food.
However, the existing legal framework
provided by section 408 of the FFDCA
states that tolerances may be set when
persons seeking such tolerances have
demonstrated that the pesticide meets
the safety standard imposed by that
statute. When new or amended
tolerances are requested for residues of
a pesticide in food or feed, the Agency,
as is required by section 408 of the
FFDCA, estimates the risk of the
potential exposure to these residues.
The Agency has concluded after this
assessment, which includes the
consideration of long-term animal
studies with metolachlor and Smetolachlor, that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate (food, water and non-dietary)
human exposure to S-metolachlor and
that, accordingly, the tolerances that
will be established by this rule are
‘‘safe.’’ That assessment included a
consideration of S-metolachlor’s
carcinogenic potential. As discussed in
Unit III.A., EPA concluded that any
potential cancer risk from S-metolachlor
is addressed by the chronic risk
assessment. That risk assessment
showed no risks of concern.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
The Agency does not differentiate
between dry and fresh cilantro leaves.
Therefore, the Agency is modifying the
tolerance proposal and establishing a
tolerance for S-metolachlor residues on
cilantro, leaves.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of S-metolachlor in or on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:27 Aug 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
beet, garden, leaves at 1.8 ppm, cilantro,
leaves at 8.0 ppm, and coriander, seed
at 0.13 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this final rule
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This final rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), 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 FFDCA section 408(n)(4). 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
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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: August 8, 2012.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a, and 371.
2. Section 180.368 is amended by
alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table in paragraph
(a)(2) to read as follows:
■
§ 180.368 S-metolachlor; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Beet, garden, leaves ................
E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM
15AUR1
*
1.8
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 158 / Wednesday, August 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
Laura Nollen, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
*
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
8.0
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
0.13
(703) 305–7390; email address:
nollen.laura@epa.gov.
*
Cilantro, leaves .........................
Coriander, seed ........................
*
*
*
*
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
*
[FR Doc. 2012–20034 Filed 8–14–12; 8:45 am]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
I. General Information
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0395; FRL–9357–5]
Fludioxonil; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of fludioxonil in
or on multiple commodities which are
identified and discussed later in this
document, associated with pesticide
petition (PP) 1E7853 and PP 1E7870.
This regulation additionally revises
several established tolerances, and
removes several established permanent
and time-limited tolerances.
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4) and Syngenta Crop Protection,
LLC, requested the tolerances associated
with PP 1E7853 and PP 1E7870,
respectively, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
August 15, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before October 15, 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: The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0395, is
available either electronically through
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the OPP Docket in the
Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), located in EPA
West, Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and
the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:27 Aug 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
A. Does this Action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
affected entities may include, but are
not limited to those engaged in the
following activities:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS
code 112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS
code 311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to
assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to
certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/
text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/
Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g),
21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2011–0395 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
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
48907
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before October 15, 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–2011–0395, by one of
the following methods:
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0395 by
one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), Mail Code: 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
Additional instructions on commenting
or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is
available at https://www.epa.gov/
dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerances
In the Federal Register of July 20,
2011 (76 FR 43231) (FRL–8880–1), EPA
issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA
section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3),
announcing the filing of a pesticide
petition, PP 1E7853, by IR–4, 500
College Road East, Suite 201W,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.516 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the fungicide fludioxonil, (4(2,2-difluoro-1,3-benzodioxol-4-yl)-1-H
-pyrrole-3-carbonitrile), in or on acerola
at 5.0 parts per million (ppm); atemoya
at 20 ppm; biriba at 20 ppm; cherimoya
at 20 ppm; custard apple at 20 ppm;
feijoa at 5.0 ppm; guava at 5.0 ppm;
ilama at 20 ppm; jaboticaba at 5.0 ppm;
passionfruit at 5.0 ppm; soursop at 20
ppm; starfruit at 5.0 ppm; sugar apple at
E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM
15AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 15, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48902-48907]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20034]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0657; FRL-9356-9]
S-Metolachlor; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of S-
metolachlor in or on beet, garden, leaves, cilantro, leaves and
coriander, seed. Interregional Research Project Number 4 requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective August 15, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 15, 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: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0657, is available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the OPP Docket in the Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), located in EPA West, Rm.
3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sidney Jackson, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-7610; email address: jackson.sidney@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to those
engaged in the following activities:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to
provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by
this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also
be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in
determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0657 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
October 15, 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-2011-0657, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), Mail Code: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of September 7, 2011 (76 FR 55329) (FRL-
8886-7), EPA issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
1E7898) by Interregional Research Project Number 4, 500 College Road
East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40
CFR 180.368 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the
herbicide S-metolachlor, S-2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-
methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamide, its R-enantiomer, and its metabolites,
determined as the derivatives, 2-[2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)amino]-1-
propanol and 4-[2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-2-hydroxy-5-methyl-3-
morpholinone, in or on cilantro, leaves, fresh at 8.0 parts per million
(ppm) cilantro, leaves, dried at 8.0 ppm, coriander, seed at 0.13 ppm
and beet, garden, leaves at 1.8 ppm. That notice referenced a summary
of the petition prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection, the registrant,
which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
EPA received one comment to the Notice of Filing. That comment is
addressed in Unit IV.C.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA
corrected the crop definition for ``cilantro'' to ``coriander'' and
removed proposed tolerances for fresh and dried cilantro leaves. The
reasons for these changes are explained in Unit IV.D.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the
[[Page 48903]]
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 FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for S-metolachlor including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with S-metolachlor
follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
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.
S-Metolachlor exhibits low acute toxicity via oral, inhalation, and
dermal routes of exposure. It causes slight eye irritation, and is non-
irritating dermally, but is a dermal sensitizer. In subchronic
(metolachlor and S-metolachlor) and chronic (metolachlor) toxicity
studies in dogs and rats decreased body weight and body weight gain
were the most commonly observed effects. No systemic toxicity was
observed when metolachlor was administered dermally. No neurotoxicity
studies with metolachlor or S-metolachlor are available. However, there
was no evidence of neurotoxic effects in the available toxicity
studies. Prenatal developmental studies in the rat and rabbit with both
metolachlor and S-metolachlor revealed no evidence of a qualitative or
quantitative susceptibility in fetal animals. A 2-generation
reproduction study with metolachlor in rats showed no evidence of
parental or reproductive toxicity. There are no residual uncertainties
with regard to pre- and/or postnatal toxicity. Metolachlor has been
evaluated for carcinogenic effects in the mouse and the rat.
Metolachlor did not cause an increase in tumors of any kind in mice. In
rats, metolachlor caused an increase in benign liver tumors in rats but
this increase was seen only at the highest dose tested and was
statistically significant compared to controls only in females. There
was no evidence of mutagenic or cytogenetic effects in vivo or in
vitro. Based on this evidence, EPA has concluded that metolachlor does
not have a common mechanism of carcinogenicity with acetochlor and
alachlor which are structurally similar. Taking into account the
qualitatively weak evidence on carcinogenic effects and the fact that
the increase in benign tumors in female rats occurs at a dose 1,500
times the chronic reference dose (cRfD), EPA has concluded that the
cRfD is protective of any potential cancer effect.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by S-metolachlor as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document entitled, ``S-Metolachlor. Human Health
Risk Assessment for the Section 3 Requests for Use on Coriander
(Cilantro) and Garden Beet Leaves,'' p. 13 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2011-0657.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD), and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for S-metolachlor used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of September 17, 2010 (75 FR 56899)
(FRL-8842-3).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to S-metolachlor, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing metolachlor and S-
metolachlor tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from S-metolachlor in food as follows:
Both the acute and chronic analyses assume tolerance-level residues
on all crops with established, pending, or proposed tolerances for
metolachlor and/or S-metolachlor. In cases where separate tolerance
listings occur for both metolachlor and S-metolachlor on the same
commodity, the higher value of the two is used in the analyses.
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 S-metolachlor. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the United
States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Nationwide Continuing Surveys
of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII), 1994-1996 and 1998. As to
residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance level residues for all
uses, 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all commodities and default
processing factors.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA's
Nationwide CSFII, 1994-1996 and 1998. As to residue levels in food, EPA
assumed tolerance level residues for all uses, 100 PCT for all
commodities and default processing factors.
iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether quantitative cancer exposure
and risk assessments are appropriate for a food-
[[Page 48904]]
use pesticide based on the weight of the evidence from cancer studies
and other relevant data. Cancer risk is quantified using a linear or
nonlinear approach. If sufficient information on the carcinogenic mode
of action is available, a threshold or nonlinear 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 determine 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 a nonlinear RfD approach is
appropriate for assessing cancer risk to S-metolachlor. Cancer risk was
assessed using the same exposure estimates as discussed in Unit
III.C.1.ii.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the dietary assessment
for S-metolachlor. Tolerance level residues and 100 PCT were assumed
for all food commodities with existing tolerances, and default
processing factors.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for S-metolachlor in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of S-metolachlor. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST),
Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/
EXAMS) Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models and
the USGA National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program monitoring
data, the Agency calculated conservative estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) of S-metolachlor and metolachlor originating
from ground water and surface water. EDWCs for metolachlor and
metolachlor were calculated for both the parent compound and the
ethanesulfonic acid (ESA) and oxanilic acid (OA) degradates. The
environmental fate data have been bridged from the racemic mixture
(50:50) of metolachlor to the newer isomer (88:12) S-metolachlor, based
on similarities in environmental fate behavior. Tier I and Tier II
screening models were employed for this assessment. For surface water,
PRZM/EXAMS and FIRST Version1.1.1 models were used to estimate drinking
water concentrations for the parent S-metolachlor and the ESA and OA
degradates, respectively. The SCI-GROW model was used to predict the
maximum acute and chronic concentrations present in shallow
groundwater. Current NAWQA monitoring data were also used to determine
EDWCs. Based on monitoring and modeling data, total EDWCs for peak and
average surface water respectively are 219 ppb (78 ppb parent + 48 ppb
metolachlor ESA+ 94 ppb metolachlor OA) and 119 ppb (18 ppb parent + 34
ppb metolachlor ESA+ 67 ppb metolachlor OA). Groundwater EDWCs (peak
and average) are 126 ppb (33 ppb parent + 64 ppb metolachlor ESA+ 30
ppb metolachlor OA).y67
For acute exposures are estimated to be 219 ppb for surface water
and 126 ppb for ground water.
For chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to
be 110 ppb for surface water and 126 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model.
For acute dietary risk assessment, the water concentration value of
219 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.
For chronic dietary risk assessment (cancer and non-cancer), the
water concentration of value 126 ppb was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
S-Metolachlor is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: Residential lawns or turf by
professional applicators. Pennant MAGNUM\TM (EPA Reg. No. 100-950) is
labeled for use on commercial (sod farm) and residential warm-season
turf grasses and other non-crop land including golf courses, sports
fields, and ornamental gardens. Since Pennant MAGNUM\TM is not
registered for homeowner purchase or use (i.e., used by professional/
commercial applicators), the only potential short-term residential risk
scenario anticipated is post-application hand-to-mouth exposure of
children playing on treated lawns. S-metolachlor incidental oral
exposure is assumed to include hand-to-mouth exposure, object-to-mouth
exposure and exposure through incidental ingestion of soil. Small
children are the population group of concern. Although the type of site
that S-metolachlor may be used on varies from golf courses to
ornamental gardens, the scenario chosen for risk assessment
(residential turf use) represents what the Agency considers the likely
upper-end of possible exposure.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
Other than metolachlor, EPA has not found S-metolachlor to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and S-
metolachlor does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore,
EPA has assumed that S-metolachlor does not have a common mechanism of
toxicity with other substances.
For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. No increase in
susceptibility was seen in developmental toxicity studies in rat and
rabbit or reproductive toxicity studies in the rat. Toxicity to
offspring was observed at dose levels the same or greater than those
causing maternal or
[[Page 48905]]
parental toxicity. Based on the results of developmental and
reproductive toxicity studies, there is not a concern for increased
qualitative and/or quantitative susceptibility following in utero
exposure to metolachlor or S-metolachlor.
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 S-metolachlor is complete, except for
an immunotoxicity and acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies
required under the amendments to the data requirements. However, based
on the results of the available toxicity studies, there is no evidence
of immunotoxicity or neurotoxicity. Thus, EPA does not expect these
data to change the existing POD for risk assessment.
ii. There is no indication that S-metolachlor 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 S-metolachlor causes an increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based on 100 PCT,
tolerance-level residues for all uses, and default processing factors.
EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and
surface water modeling used to assess exposure to S-metolachlor in
drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative assumptions to assess
post-application exposure of children as well as incidental oral
exposure of toddlers. These assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by S-metolachlor.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
aPAD and cPAD. For linear cancer risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the estimated aggregate exposure.
Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term risks are evaluated by
comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, and residential exposure
to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to S-metolachlor will occupy 1.5% of the aPAD for all infants < 1 year
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
S-metolachlor from food and water will utilize 11.6% of the cPAD for
all infants < 1 year old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
S-metolachlor is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
S-metolachlor is currently registered for uses that could result in
short-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it
is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water
with short-term residential exposures to S-metolachlor. Using the
exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-term exposures,
EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water, and residential
exposures including incidental oral exposure from all possible sources:
Combined hand-to-mouth, object-to-mouth, and soil ingestion oral
exposure result in an aggregate MOE of 860. Because EPA's level of
concern for S-metolachlor is a MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are not
of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however, S-
metolachlor 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 PODs used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for S-
metolachlor.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. As explained in Unit
III.A. of this document, EPA has concluded that the chronic RfD is
protective of cancer effects, and, as shown above, the chronic risk
assessment indicated that aggregate exposure to S-metolachlor does not
pose a risk of concern.
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 S-metolachlor residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodologies (gas chromatography with
nitrogen phosphorous detector (GC/NPD) method (Method I) for
determining residues in/on crop commodities and a gas chromatography
with mass spectroscopy detector (GC/MSD) method (Method II) for
determining residues in livestock commodities) are available to enforce
the tolerance expression. IR-4 and Syngenta have proposed a high
pressure liquid chromatography with mass spectroscopy/mass spectroscopy
(HPLC/MS/MS) enantiomer-specific method for the enforcement of the
proposed tolerances, Method 1848-01. The method uses a chiral HPLC
column to separate out the S-enantiomers (SYN506357 and SYN508500) of
the hydrolysis products CGA-37913 and CGA-49751. This method has been
determined to be adequate for enforcement purposes.
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 United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international
[[Page 48906]]
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.
Neither Codex, Canada, or Mexico has established or proposed
maximum residue limits (MRLs) for S-metolachlor on cilantro or garden
beet leaves.
C. Response to Comments
In the one comment received, the commenter objected to EPA
approving use of this chemical and asked that EPA ban further use of
this ``toxic chemical.'' The commenter went on to state that there are
several toxic effects attributed to this chemical including evidence of
carcinogenicity. The Agency understands the commenter's concerns and
recognizes that some individuals believe that certain pesticide
chemicals should not be permitted in our food. However, the existing
legal framework provided by section 408 of the FFDCA states that
tolerances may be set when persons seeking such tolerances have
demonstrated that the pesticide meets the safety standard imposed by
that statute. When new or amended tolerances are requested for residues
of a pesticide in food or feed, the Agency, as is required by section
408 of the FFDCA, estimates the risk of the potential exposure to these
residues. The Agency has concluded after this assessment, which
includes the consideration of long-term animal studies with metolachlor
and S-metolachlor, that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate (food, water and non-dietary) human exposure
to S-metolachlor and that, accordingly, the tolerances that will be
established by this rule are ``safe.'' That assessment included a
consideration of S-metolachlor's carcinogenic potential. As discussed
in Unit III.A., EPA concluded that any potential cancer risk from S-
metolachlor is addressed by the chronic risk assessment. That risk
assessment showed no risks of concern.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
The Agency does not differentiate between dry and fresh cilantro
leaves. Therefore, the Agency is modifying the tolerance proposal and
establishing a tolerance for S-metolachlor residues on cilantro,
leaves.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of S-metolachlor
in or on beet, garden, leaves at 1.8 ppm, cilantro, leaves at 8.0 ppm,
and coriander, seed at 0.13 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d)
in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has
been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule
is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain
any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), 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 FFDCA section 408(n)(4). 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: August 8, 2012.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a, and 371.
0
2. Section 180.368 is amended by alphabetically adding the following
commodities to the table in paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.368 S-metolachlor; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Beet, garden, leaves....................................... 1.8
[[Page 48907]]
* * * * *
Cilantro, leaves........................................... 8.0
Coriander, seed............................................ 0.13
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-20034 Filed 8-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P