Nitric Acid; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance, 53144-53150 [2012-21354]
Download as PDF
53144
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this rule
will not result in such an expenditure,
we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
8. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not cause a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
9. Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
10. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
11. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
12. Energy Effects
This action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under Executive Order
13211, Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
EMCDONALD on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
13. Technical Standards
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
14. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023–01 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
VerDate Mar<15>2010
10:37 Aug 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have determined that this action is one
of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the
establishment of a safety zone, and
therefore, it is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph
34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant
Instruction. A final environmental
analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination are available in
the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental
impact from this rule.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and record keeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR parts 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapters 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.T09–0814 to read as
follows:
■
§ 165.T09–0814 Safety Zone; Cleveland
National Air Show, Cleveland, OH.
(a) Location. The safety zone will
encompass a portion of Lake Erie and
Cleveland Harbor near Burke Lakefront
Airport from position 41°30′20″ N and
081°42′20″ W to 41°30′50″ N and
081°42′49″ W, to 41°32′09″ N and
081°39′49″ W, to 41°31′53″ N and
081°39′24″ W, then return to the original
position (NAD 83).
(b) Enforcement Period. This
regulation will be enforced from 11:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on August 30, 2012,
10:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on August 31,
2012, and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on
September 1 through 3, 2012.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in section 165.23
of this part, entry into, transiting, or
anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated on-scene representative.
(2) This safety zone is closed to all
vessel traffic, except as may be
permitted by the Captain of the Port
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Buffalo or his designated on-scene
representative.
(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of
the Captain of the Port Buffalo is any
Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or
petty officer who has been designated
by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act
on his behalf.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter
or operate within the safety zone shall
contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo
or his on-scene representative to obtain
permission to do so. The Captain of the
Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative may be contacted via
VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given
permission to enter or operate in the
safety zone must comply with all
directions given to them by the Captain
of the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene
representative.
Dated: August 22, 2012.
S.M. Wischmann,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2012–21532 Filed 8–30–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0116; FRL–9338–2]
Nitric Acid; Exemption From the
Requirement of a Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of nitric acid
(CAS Reg. No. 7697–37–2) when used as
an inert ingredient in antimicrobial
pesticide formulations applied to foodcontact surfaces in public eating places,
dairy processing equipment, and foodprocessing equipment and utensils at a
maximum level in the end-use
concentration of 1,000 parts per million
(ppm). Ecolab Inc. submitted a petition
to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting
establishment of an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of nitric acid.
DATES: This regulation is effective
August 31, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before October 30, 2012, and must
be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\31AUR1.SGM
31AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0116, 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: Lisa
Austin, Registration Division (7505P),
Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–7894; email address:
austin.lisa@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
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).
EMCDONALD on DSK67QTVN1PROD 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/textidx?&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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
10:37 Aug 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2012–0116 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 30, 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–2012–0116, 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.
II. Petition for Exemption
In the Federal Register of April 7,
2000 (65 FR 18324) (FRL–6499–7), EPA
issued a notice pursuant to section 408
of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a, announcing
the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
9E6029) by Ecolab Inc., 370 N. Wabasha
Street, St. Paul, MN 55102. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.940 be
amended by establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of nitric acid (CAS Reg. No.
7697–37–2) when used as an inert
ingredient in antimicrobial pesticide
formulations applied to food-contact
surfaces in public eating places, dairy
processing equipment, and foodprocessing equipment and utensils at a
maximum level in the end-use
concentration of 1,000 parts per million
(ppm). That notice referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by
Ecolab Inc., the petitioner, which is
available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
53145
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients
that are not active ingredients as defined
in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are
not limited to, the following types of
ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own):
Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as
polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and
diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose;
wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol
dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ‘‘inert’’ is not
intended to imply nontoxicity; the
ingredient may or may not be
chemically active. Generally, EPA has
exempted inert ingredients from the
requirement of a tolerance based on the
low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
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 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 * * *.’’
EPA establishes exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance only in those
cases where it can be clearly
demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide
chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no
appreciable risks to human health. In
order to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the
toxicity of the inert in conjunction with
possible exposure to residues of the
inert ingredient through food, drinking
water, and through other exposures that
E:\FR\FM\31AUR1.SGM
31AUR1
53146
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
EMCDONALD on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
occur as a result of pesticide use in
residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a finite tolerance is not
necessary to ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be
established.
Consistent with section 408(c)(2)(A)
of FFDCA, and the factors specified in
FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), 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 nitric acid
including exposure resulting from the
exemption established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with nitric acid 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. Specific
information on the studies received and
the nature of the adverse effects caused
by nitric acid as well as the noobserved-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL)
and the lowest-observed-adverse-effectlevel (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies
are discussed in this unit.
Nitric acid is a highly corrosive
inorganic acid. In a concentrated form,
nitric acid is corrosive at the site of
contact and does not elicit systemic
toxicity. Acute dermal and eye
exposures to concentrated forms of
nitric acid can result in skin burns and
irreversible eye corrosion. Acute
inhalation exposure to nitric acid can
result in severe respiratory irritation
followed by pulmonary edema. Acute
ingestion of nitric acid may result in
ulceration, hemorrhage and perforation
of the esophagus and stomach.
The U.S. Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA)
Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for
nitric acid as well as the American
Conference of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit
Value (TLV) for nitric acid is 2 ppm (5
milligrams/meter (mg/m3)).
While there are no data on the toxicity
of dilute forms of nitric acid following
oral exposure, the toxicity of dilute
nitric acid would be expected to be
comparable to the toxicity of the NO3anion known as nitrate.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
10:37 Aug 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
Sodium nitrate. Several studies were
available for sodium nitrate. These
studies included a 6-week oral toxicity
range-finding study, chronic/
carcinogenicity studies in rodents and a
2-generation toxicity study in rabbits. In
a 6-week oral toxicity study in F344
rats, sodium nitrate was administered in
the diet. Signs of toxicity were
manifested as decreased body weight
gain at ≥5% (approximately 2,500
milligrams/kilograms/day (mg/kg/day)).
In the International Agency for Research
On Cancer (IARC) Monographs on the
Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to
Humans (Vol 94), the carcinogenic
potential of sodium nitrate was
evaluated in several studies in rodents.
In two studies in mice, no evidence of
carcinogenic activity of sodium nitrate
alone was observed in the drinking
water at concentrations up to
approximately 5,000 mg/kg/day. In four
studies in rats, no increased incidence
of tumors was observed when sodium
nitrate alone was administered in the
drinking water or in the diet at
concentrations up to approximately
2,500 mg/kg/day. Therefore, IARC
concluded that there is inadequate
evidence in humans for the
carcinogenicity of nitrate in food or
drinking water.
There were no treatment related
effects observed in the 2-generation
reproduction study in rabbits. In
addition, the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) sponsored several
reproductive and developmental studies
in rodents, hamsters and rabbits treated
with sodium nitrate. No adverse effects
were observed in maternal reproductive
parameters nor was there fetotoxicity or
fetal malformations up to the maximum
doses tested in each species (41 mg/kg/
day in mice and hamsters and 66 mg/
kg/day in rats and rabbits).
Immunotoxicity studies for nitric acid
were not available for review. However,
there was no evidence of potential
immunotoxicity in any of the submitted
studies. Therefore, nitric acid is not
expected to be immunotoxic.
There were three human
epidemiological studies available for
review. These epidemiological studies
reported that cases of infant
methemoglobinemia are associated with
exposure to nitrate in drinking water.
The American Public Health
Association (APHA) conducted a survey
to identify clinical cases of infantile
methemoglobinemia that were
associated with ingestion of nitratecontaminated water. They concluded
that greater incidences of
methemoglobinemia were observed in
infants consuming >1.8 mg/kg/day of
sodium nitrate. Methemoglobinemia
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
was not observed in any of the studies
where infants consumed water
containing less than 1.6 mg/kg/day of
sodium nitrate.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by nitric acid 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
‘‘Nitric Acid; Human Health Risk
Assessment and Ecological Effects
Assessment to Support Proposed
Exemption from the Requirement of a
Tolerance When Used as Inert
Ingredients in Pesticide Formulations,’’
pp. 9–26 in docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2012–0116.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which no adverse effects are
observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
The chronic reference dose (cRfD) of
1.6 mg/kg/day and an uncertainty factor
of 1X were established based on the
results of the American Public Health
Association’s epidemiology study in
infants. The endpoint was based on the
concentration of sodium nitrate (1.6 mg/
kg/day) in water at which
methemoglobinemia was not observed
in infants. Data from this study
represented the most sensitive endpoint
E:\FR\FM\31AUR1.SGM
31AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
in the most sensitive population;
therefore, the standard uncertainty
factors were reduced to 1X.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for nitric acid used for human
53147
risk assessment is shown in the Table of
this unit.
TABLE —SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR NITRIC ACID FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK ASSESSMENT
Exposure/scenario
Acute dietary (all populations).
Chronic dietary (All populations).
Incidental oral short-term (1
to 30 days).
Incidental oral intermediateterm (1 to 6 months).
Dermal short-term (1 to 30
days).
Dermal intermediate-term (1
to 6 months).
Inhalation short-term (1 to
30 days).
Inhalation (1 to 6 months) ...
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).
Point of departure and uncertainty/safety factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
There were no effects that could be attributed to a single dose in the database. Therefore, an acute dietary assessment was not necessary.
NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day
Chronic RfD = 1.6 mg/kg/
APHA Human Epidemiological Survey LOAEL = 1.8–
UFA = 1x
day
3.2 mg/kg/day based on early clinical signs of
UFH = 1x
cPAD = 1.6 mg/kg/day
methemoglobinemia in excess of 10% in 0–3
FQPA SF = 1x
months old infants.
NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day
LOC for MOE = 1
APHA Human Epidemiological Survey LOAEL = 1.8–
UFA = 1x
3.2 mg/kg/day based on early clinical signs of
UFH = 1x
methemoglobinemia in excess of 10% in 0–3
FQPA SF = 1x
months old infants.
NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day
LOC for MOE = 1
APHA Human Epidemiological Survey LOAEL = 1.8–
UFA = 1x
3.2 mg/kg/day based on early clinical signs of
UFH = 1x
methemoglobinemia in excess of 10% in 0–3
FQPA SF = 1x
months old infants.
NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day
LOC for MOE = 1
APHA Human Epidemiological Survey LOAEL = 1.8–
3.2 mg/kg/day based on early clinical signs of
UFA = 1x
UFH = 1x
methemoglobinemia in excess of 10% in 0–3
FQPA SF = 1x
months old infants.
NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day
LOC for MOE = 1
APHA Human Epidemiological Survey LOAEL = 1.8–
UFA = 1x
3.2 mg/kg/day based on early clinical signs of
UFH = 1x
methemoglobinemia in excess of 10% in 0–3
FQPA SF = 1x
months old infants.
NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day
LOC for MOE = 1
APHA Human Epidemiological Survey LOAEL = 1.8–
(inhalation absorption
3.2 mg/kg/day based on early clinical signs of
rate = 100%)
methemoglobinemia in excess of 10% in 0–3
UFA = 1x
months old infants.
UFH = 1x
FQPA SF = 1x
NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day
LOC for MOE = 1
APHA Human Epidemiological Survey LOAEL = 1.8–
(inhalation absorption
3.2 mg/kg/day based on early clinical signs of
rate = 100%)
methemoglobinemia in excess of 10% in 0–3
UFA = 1x
months old infants.
UFH = 1x
FQPA SF = 1x
Not likely to be carcinogenic based on the lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in the submitted studies.
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population
(intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term risk assessment. UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose
(a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern.
EMCDONALD on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
In evaluating dietary exposure to
nitric acid, EPA considered exposure
under the petitioned-for exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance. EPA
assessed dietary exposures from nitric
acid in food as follows:
The requested exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for the use of
nitric acid could allow for uses in food
contact surface sanitizing solutions in
which residues of nitric acid could
migrate to food or otherwise be ingested.
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to nitric acid, EPA considered
exposure under the proposed exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance. In
the absence of actual dietary exposure
data resulting from this use, the EPA has
utilized a conservative, health-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
10:37 Aug 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
protective method of estimating dietary
intake that is based upon conservative
assumptions related to the amount of
residues that can be transferred to foods
as a result of the proposed use of nitric
acid in food contact sanitizing pesticide
products. This same methodology has
been utilized by EPA in estimating
dietary exposures to antimicrobial
pesticides used in food-handling
settings. A complete description of the
approach used to assess dietary
exposures resulting from food contact
sanitizing solution uses of nitric acid
can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document
‘‘Nitric Acid; Human Health Risk
Assessment and Ecological Effects
Assessment to Support Proposed
Exemption from the Requirement of a
Tolerance When Used as Inert
Ingredients in Pesticide Formulations,’’
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
pp. 9–26 in docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2012–0116.
EPA assessed dietary exposures from
nitric acid in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. No adverse effects
attributable to a single exposure of nitric
acid were seen in the toxicity databases.
Therefore, an acute dietary exposure
assessment for nitric acid is not
necessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, the Agency believes the
assumptions used to estimate chronic
dietary exposures lead to an extremely
conservative assessment of chronic
dietary risk due to a series of
compounded conservatisms. First, when
a surface is treated with a disinfectant,
a quantity of the disinfectant remains on
the surface (Residual Solution). In the
absence of any other data, EPA has used
E:\FR\FM\31AUR1.SGM
31AUR1
EMCDONALD on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
53148
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
an estimated worst-case concentration
of 1 mg of solution per square
centimeter (cm) of treated surface area
for this quantity.
Second, the conservatism of this
methodology is compounded by EPA’s
decision to assume a worst case scenario
that all food that an individual
consumes will come into contact with
4,000 cm2 of sanitized non-porous foodcontact surfaces. This contact area
represents all the surface area from
silverware, china, and glass used by a
person who regularly eats three meals
per day at an institutional or public
facility. The surface area of counter tops
that comes in contact with food is
expected to be smaller than the surface
area for food utensils. As a conservative
estimate, EPA assumed that 2,000 cm2
of treated counter top surface area,
comes into contact with an individual’s
food per day.
Third, EPA assumes that 100% of the
material present on food contact
surfaces will migrate to food.
iii. Cancer. Sodium nitrate did not
cause an increase in tumors in rodents
at doses up to 2,500 mg/kg/day.
Therefore, based on the weight of
evidence, nitric acid is not likely to
cause cancer in humans and a cancer
dietary exposure assessment is not
necessary to assess cancer risk.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The proposed use of nitric acid
will not result in its presence in surface
water or ground water and therefore not
contribute to dietary exposure.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers),
carpets, swimming pools, and hard
surface disinfection on walls, floors,
tables).
Nitric acid is not used as an inert
ingredient in pesticide products that are
registered for specific uses that may
result in both indoor and outdoor
residential exposures. Therefore, a
residential exposure and risk
assessment was not conducted for nitric
acid.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found nitric acid to share
a common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and nitric acid
VerDate Mar<15>2010
10:37 Aug 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that nitric acid 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
Food Quality Protection Act (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.
There is no concern for fetal
susceptibility. There were no treatment
related effects observed in the 2generation reproduction study in
rabbits. Also, the FDA sponsored several
reproductive and developmental studies
in rodents, hamsters and rabbits treated
with sodium nitrate. No adverse effects
were observed in maternal reproductive
parameters nor was there fetotoxicity or
fetal malformations up to the maximum
doses tested in each species (41 mg/kg/
day in mice and hamsters and 66 mg/
kg/day in rats and rabbits). Fetal
susceptibility was not observed in these
any of these studies. Therefore, there are
no concerns for residual uncertainties
concerning prenatal and postnatal
toxicity.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for nitric acid
is adequate as it is based on the use of
sodium nitrate data for which there is a
robust toxicity database. The NOAEL
used for risk assessment was derived
from the critical toxic effect in the most
sensitive human subpopulation (infants
age 8 days to 5 months).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ii. There is no indication that nitric
acid 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 indication that nitric
acid is a immunotoxic chemical and
there is no need additional UFs to
account for immunotoxicity.
iv. There is no evidence that nitric
acid results in increased susceptibility
in in utero rodents. Several reproductive
and developmental studies in rodents,
hamsters and rabbits showed no
evidence of increased fetal
susceptibility at doses as high as 41 mg/
kg/day in mice and hamsters and 66 mg/
kg/day in rats and rabbits. Further,
although effects in infants were found in
an epidemiological study, the cRfD (1.6
mg/kg/day) is based on a clear NOAEL
established in that study.
v. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
EPA made conservative (protective)
assumptions regarding dietary exposure
to nitric acid. This assessment will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by nitric acid.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic pesticide exposures are safe by
comparing aggregate exposure estimates
to the aPAD and cPAD. The aPAD and
cPAD represent the highest safe
exposures, taking into account all
appropriate SFs. EPA calculates the
aPAD and cPAD by dividing the POD by
all applicable UFs. For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the probability of
additional cancer cases 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 POD to
ensure that the MOE called for by the
product of all applicable UFs is not
exceeded.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account acute
exposure estimates from dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, nitric acid is not
expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to nitric acid from
dietary exposure will utilize 24% of the
cPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses
for nitric acid.
E:\FR\FM\31AUR1.SGM
31AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
Because no short-term adverse effect
was identified, nitric acid is not
expected to pose a short-term risk.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Because no intermediate-term adverse
effect was identified, nitric acid is not
expected to pose an intermediate-term
risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in adequate
rodent carcinogenicity studies, nitric
acid is not expected to pose a cancer
risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to nitric acid
residues under reasonably foreseeable
circumstances. Therefore, the
establishment of an exemption from
tolerance under 40 CFR 180.940(a) for
residues of nitric acid when used as an
inert ingredient in pesticide
formulations applied to food-contact
surfaces in public eating places, dairy
processing equipment, and foodprocessing equipment and utensils at a
maximum level in the end-use
concentration of 1,000 ppm, is safe
under FFDCA section 408.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An analytical method is not required
for enforcement purposes since the
Agency is establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance
without any numerical limitation.
EMCDONALD on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N.
Food and Agriculture Organization/
World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized
VerDate Mar<15>2010
10:37 Aug 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
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 nitric acid.
VI. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance is established
under 40 CFR 180.940(a) for nitric acid
(CAS No. 7697–37–2) when used as an
inert ingredient in pesticide
formulations applied to food-contact
surfaces in public eating places, dairy
processing equipment, and foodprocessing equipment and utensils at a
maximum level in the end-use
concentration of 1,000 ppm.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes a tolerance
under section 408(d) of FFDCA in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled Regulatory
Planning and Review (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this final rule
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045,
entitled Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB
approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., nor does it require any special
considerations under Executive Order
12898, entitled Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
and food retailers, not States or tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
53149
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this final rule. In addition, this final
rule does not impose any enforceable
duty or contain any unfunded mandate
as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VIII. 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 17, 2012.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
■
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\31AUR1.SGM
31AUR1
53150
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.940(a), the table is
amended by adding alphabetically the
following inert ingredient to read as
follows:
■
Pesticide chemical
*
*
*
*
7697–37–2
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 635
[Docket No. 120306154–2241–02]
RIN 0648–XC162
Atlantic Highly Migratory Species;
Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Fisheries
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; inseason
General category retention limit
adjustment.
AGENCY:
NMFS is adjusting the
Atlantic tunas General category daily
Atlantic bluefin tuna (BFT) retention
limit from one to three large medium or
giant BFT for the September, October,
November, and December time periods
of the 2012 fishing year, based on
consideration of the regulatory
determination criteria regarding
inseason adjustments. This action
applies to Atlantic tunas General
category permitted vessels and to Highly
Migratory Species (HMS) Charter/
Headboat category permitted vessels
when fishing commercially for BFT.
DATES: Effective September 1, 2012,
through December 31, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sarah McLaughlin or Brad McHale,
978–281–9260.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulations implemented under the
authority of the Atlantic Tunas
Convention Act (ATCA; 16 U.S.C. 971 et
seq.) and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act; 16 U.S.C. 1801
et seq.) governing the harvest of BFT by
SUMMARY:
EMCDONALD on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
10:37 Aug 30, 2012
Jkt 226001
*
*
*
*
*
When ready for use, the end-use concentration is not to exceed 1,000 ppm.
*
*
persons and vessels subject to U.S.
jurisdiction are found at 50 CFR part
635. Section 635.27 subdivides the U.S.
BFT quota recommended by the
International Commission for the
Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT)
among the various domestic fishing
categories, per the allocations
established in the 2006 Consolidated
Atlantic HMS Fishery Management Plan
(Consolidated HMS FMP) (71 FR 58058,
October 2, 2006) and in accordance with
implementing regulations. NMFS is
required under ATCA and the
Magnuson-Stevens Act to provide U.S.
fishing vessels with a reasonable
opportunity to harvest the ICCATrecommended quota.
The 2010 ICCAT recommendation
regarding western BFT management
resulted in baseline U.S. quotas for 2011
and for 2012 of 923.7 mt (not including
the 25 mt ICCAT allocated to the United
States to account for bycatch of BFT in
pelagic longline fisheries in the
Northeast Distant Gear Restricted Area).
The 2011 BFT quota rule (76 FR 39019,
July 5, 2011) established a quota of
435.1 mt for the General category fishery
(the commercial tunas fishery in which
handgear is used). Each of the General
category time periods (January, June
through August, September, October
through November, and December) is
allocated a portion of the annual
General category quota. Through a
November 2011 final rule implementing
adjustments to the BFT General and
Harpoon category regulations (76 FR
74003, November 30, 2011), the January
BFT fishery may remain open until the
January subquota is reached or March
31 (whichever happens first). Consistent
with the allocation scheme established
in the Consolidated HMS FMP and
implementing regulations, the baseline
category subquotas were established in
the 2011 BFT quota rule as follows: 23.1
mt for January; 217.6 mt for June
through August; 115.3 mt for
September; 56.6 mt for October through
November; and 22.6 mt for January.
Although NMFS published quota
specifications for 2012 (77 FR 44161,
PO 00000
(a) * * *
Limits
*
[FR Doc. 2012–21354 Filed 8–30–12; 8:45 am]
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
CAS Reg. No.
*
*
Nitric acid ..................................................
*
§ 180.940 Tolerance exemptions for active
and inert ingredients for use in
antimicrobial formulations (Food-contact
surface sanitizing solutions).
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
July 27, 2012), the baseline General
category quota and subquotas as
codified have not changed from the
amounts established for the 2011 fishing
year.
Unless changed, the General category
daily retention limit starting on
September 1 would be the default
retention limit of one large medium or
giant BFT (measuring 73 inches (185
cm) curved fork length (CFL) or greater)
per vessel per day/trip (§ 635.23(a)(2)).
This default retention limit applies to
General category permitted vessels and
to HMS Charter/Headboat category
permitted vessels when fishing
commercially for BFT.
Adjustment of General Category Daily
Retention Limit
Under § 635.23(a)(4), NMFS may
increase or decrease the daily retention
limit of large medium and giant BFT
over a range of zero to a maximum of
five per vessel based on consideration of
the relevant criteria provided under
§ 635.27(a)(8), which include: The
usefulness of information obtained from
catches in the particular category for
biological sampling and monitoring of
the status of the stock; effects of the
adjustment on BFT rebuilding and
overfishing; effects of the adjustment on
accomplishing the objectives of the
fishery management plan; variations in
seasonal BFT distribution, abundance,
or migration patterns; effects of catch
rates in one area precluding vessels in
another area from having a reasonable
opportunity to harvest a portion of the
category’s quota; and review of dealer
reports, daily landing trends, and the
availability of the BFT on the fishing
grounds. Unused General category quota
rolls forward within a fishing year to the
subsequent subquota time period, e.g.,
from the June through August period to
the September period, and so on.
For the 2011 fishing year, NMFS
adjusted the General category limit from
the default level of one large medium or
giant BFT as follows: Two large medium
or giant BFT for the January subquota
period (75 FR 79309, December 20,
E:\FR\FM\31AUR1.SGM
31AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 170 (Friday, August 31, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53144-53150]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21354]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0116; FRL-9338-2]
Nitric Acid; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of nitric acid (CAS Reg. No. 7697-37-2)
when used as an inert ingredient in antimicrobial pesticide
formulations applied to food-contact surfaces in public eating places,
dairy processing equipment, and food-processing equipment and utensils
at a maximum level in the end-use concentration of 1,000 parts per
million (ppm). Ecolab Inc. submitted a petition to EPA under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting establishment
of an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation
eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for
residues of nitric acid.
DATES: This regulation is effective August 31, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 30, 2012,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part
[[Page 53145]]
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-2012-0116, 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: Lisa Austin, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-7894; email address: austin.lisa@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
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, 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-2012-0116 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 30, 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-2012-0116, 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.
II. Petition for Exemption
In the Federal Register of April 7, 2000 (65 FR 18324) (FRL-6499-
7), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 9E6029) by
Ecolab Inc., 370 N. Wabasha Street, St. Paul, MN 55102. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.940 be amended by establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of nitric acid (CAS
Reg. No. 7697-37-2) when used as an inert ingredient in antimicrobial
pesticide formulations applied to food-contact surfaces in public
eating places, dairy processing equipment, and food-processing
equipment and utensils at a maximum level in the end-use concentration
of 1,000 parts per million (ppm). That notice referenced a summary of
the petition prepared by Ecolab Inc., the petitioner, which is
available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
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 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 * * *.''
EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the
inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures
that
[[Page 53146]]
occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA is
able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be established.
Consistent with section 408(c)(2)(A) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), 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 nitric acid including exposure
resulting from the exemption established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with nitric acid 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. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by nitric acid as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in this
unit.
Nitric acid is a highly corrosive inorganic acid. In a concentrated
form, nitric acid is corrosive at the site of contact and does not
elicit systemic toxicity. Acute dermal and eye exposures to
concentrated forms of nitric acid can result in skin burns and
irreversible eye corrosion. Acute inhalation exposure to nitric acid
can result in severe respiratory irritation followed by pulmonary
edema. Acute ingestion of nitric acid may result in ulceration,
hemorrhage and perforation of the esophagus and stomach.
The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for nitric acid as well as the
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH)
Threshold Limit Value (TLV) for nitric acid is 2 ppm (5 milligrams/
meter (mg/m\3\)).
While there are no data on the toxicity of dilute forms of nitric
acid following oral exposure, the toxicity of dilute nitric acid would
be expected to be comparable to the toxicity of the NO3-
anion known as nitrate.
Sodium nitrate. Several studies were available for sodium nitrate.
These studies included a 6-week oral toxicity range-finding study,
chronic/carcinogenicity studies in rodents and a 2-generation toxicity
study in rabbits. In a 6-week oral toxicity study in F344 rats, sodium
nitrate was administered in the diet. Signs of toxicity were manifested
as decreased body weight gain at =5% (approximately 2,500
milligrams/kilograms/day (mg/kg/day)). In the International Agency for
Research On Cancer (IARC) Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic
Risks to Humans (Vol 94), the carcinogenic potential of sodium nitrate
was evaluated in several studies in rodents. In two studies in mice, no
evidence of carcinogenic activity of sodium nitrate alone was observed
in the drinking water at concentrations up to approximately 5,000 mg/
kg/day. In four studies in rats, no increased incidence of tumors was
observed when sodium nitrate alone was administered in the drinking
water or in the diet at concentrations up to approximately 2,500 mg/kg/
day. Therefore, IARC concluded that there is inadequate evidence in
humans for the carcinogenicity of nitrate in food or drinking water.
There were no treatment related effects observed in the 2-
generation reproduction study in rabbits. In addition, the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) sponsored several reproductive and
developmental studies in rodents, hamsters and rabbits treated with
sodium nitrate. No adverse effects were observed in maternal
reproductive parameters nor was there fetotoxicity or fetal
malformations up to the maximum doses tested in each species (41 mg/kg/
day in mice and hamsters and 66 mg/kg/day in rats and rabbits).
Immunotoxicity studies for nitric acid were not available for
review. However, there was no evidence of potential immunotoxicity in
any of the submitted studies. Therefore, nitric acid is not expected to
be immunotoxic.
There were three human epidemiological studies available for
review. These epidemiological studies reported that cases of infant
methemoglobinemia are associated with exposure to nitrate in drinking
water. The American Public Health Association (APHA) conducted a survey
to identify clinical cases of infantile methemoglobinemia that were
associated with ingestion of nitrate-contaminated water. They concluded
that greater incidences of methemoglobinemia were observed in infants
consuming >1.8 mg/kg/day of sodium nitrate. Methemoglobinemia was not
observed in any of the studies where infants consumed water containing
less than 1.6 mg/kg/day of sodium nitrate.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by nitric acid 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 ``Nitric Acid; Human Health Risk
Assessment and Ecological Effects Assessment to Support Proposed
Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance When Used as Inert
Ingredients in Pesticide Formulations,'' pp. 9-26 in docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0116.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
The chronic reference dose (cRfD) of 1.6 mg/kg/day and an
uncertainty factor of 1X were established based on the results of the
American Public Health Association's epidemiology study in infants. The
endpoint was based on the concentration of sodium nitrate (1.6 mg/kg/
day) in water at which methemoglobinemia was not observed in infants.
Data from this study represented the most sensitive endpoint
[[Page 53147]]
in the most sensitive population; therefore, the standard uncertainty
factors were reduced to 1X.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for nitric acid used for
human risk assessment is shown in the Table of this unit.
Table --Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Nitric Acid for Use in Human Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure and
Exposure/scenario uncertainty/safety RfD, PAD, LOC for risk Study and toxicological
factors assessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (all populations).... There were no effects that could be attributed to a single dose in the
database. Therefore, an acute dietary assessment was not necessary.
Chronic dietary (All populations).. NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day Chronic RfD = 1.6 mg/ APHA Human Epidemiological
UFA = 1x kg/day Survey LOAEL = 1.8-3.2 mg/
UFH = 1x cPAD = 1.6 mg/kg/day kg/day based on early
FQPA SF = 1x clinical signs of
methemoglobinemia in
excess of 10% in 0-3
months old infants.
Incidental oral short-term (1 to 30 NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 1 APHA Human Epidemiological
days). UFA = 1x Survey LOAEL = 1.8-3.2 mg/
UFH = 1x kg/day based on early
FQPA SF = 1x clinical signs of
methemoglobinemia in
excess of 10% in 0-3
months old infants.
Incidental oral intermediate-term NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 1 APHA Human Epidemiological
(1 to 6 months). UFA = 1x Survey LOAEL = 1.8-3.2 mg/
UFH = 1x kg/day based on early
FQPA SF = 1x clinical signs of
methemoglobinemia in
excess of 10% in 0-3
months old infants.
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days)... NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 1 APHA Human Epidemiological
UFA = 1x Survey LOAEL = 1.8-3.2 mg/
UFH = 1x kg/day based on early
FQPA SF = 1x clinical signs of
methemoglobinemia in
excess of 10% in 0-3
months old infants.
Dermal intermediate-term (1 to 6 NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 1 APHA Human Epidemiological
months). UFA = 1x Survey LOAEL = 1.8-3.2 mg/
UFH = 1x kg/day based on early
FQPA SF = 1x clinical signs of
methemoglobinemia in
excess of 10% in 0-3
months old infants.
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 1 APHA Human Epidemiological
days). (inhalation absorption Survey LOAEL = 1.8-3.2 mg/
rate = 100%) kg/day based on early
UFA = 1x clinical signs of
UFH = 1x methemoglobinemia in
FQPA SF = 1x excess of 10% in 0-3
months old infants.
Inhalation (1 to 6 months)......... NOAEL= 1.6 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 1 APHA Human Epidemiological
(inhalation absorption Survey LOAEL = 1.8-3.2 mg/
rate = 100%) kg/day based on early
UFA = 1x clinical signs of
UFH = 1x methemoglobinemia in
FQPA SF = 1x excess of 10% in 0-3
months old infants.
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).. Not likely to be carcinogenic based on the lack of evidence of
carcinogenicity in the submitted studies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members
of the human population (intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term
study for long-term risk assessment. UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. FQPA
SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD =
reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern.
C. Exposure Assessment
In evaluating dietary exposure to nitric acid, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance. EPA assessed dietary exposures from nitric acid in food as
follows:
The requested exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for the
use of nitric acid could allow for uses in food contact surface
sanitizing solutions in which residues of nitric acid could migrate to
food or otherwise be ingested.
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to nitric acid, EPA considered exposure under the proposed
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. In the absence of actual
dietary exposure data resulting from this use, the EPA has utilized a
conservative, health-protective method of estimating dietary intake
that is based upon conservative assumptions related to the amount of
residues that can be transferred to foods as a result of the proposed
use of nitric acid in food contact sanitizing pesticide products. This
same methodology has been utilized by EPA in estimating dietary
exposures to antimicrobial pesticides used in food-handling settings. A
complete description of the approach used to assess dietary exposures
resulting from food contact sanitizing solution uses of nitric acid can
be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document ``Nitric Acid; Human
Health Risk Assessment and Ecological Effects Assessment to Support
Proposed Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance When Used as
Inert Ingredients in Pesticide Formulations,'' pp. 9-26 in docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0116.
EPA assessed dietary exposures from nitric acid in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. No adverse effects attributable to a single
exposure of nitric acid were seen in the toxicity databases. Therefore,
an acute dietary exposure assessment for nitric acid is not necessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, the Agency believes the assumptions used to estimate
chronic dietary exposures lead to an extremely conservative assessment
of chronic dietary risk due to a series of compounded conservatisms.
First, when a surface is treated with a disinfectant, a quantity of the
disinfectant remains on the surface (Residual Solution). In the absence
of any other data, EPA has used
[[Page 53148]]
an estimated worst-case concentration of 1 mg of solution per square
centimeter (cm) of treated surface area for this quantity.
Second, the conservatism of this methodology is compounded by EPA's
decision to assume a worst case scenario that all food that an
individual consumes will come into contact with 4,000 cm\2\ of
sanitized non-porous food-contact surfaces. This contact area
represents all the surface area from silverware, china, and glass used
by a person who regularly eats three meals per day at an institutional
or public facility. The surface area of counter tops that comes in
contact with food is expected to be smaller than the surface area for
food utensils. As a conservative estimate, EPA assumed that 2,000 cm\2\
of treated counter top surface area, comes into contact with an
individual's food per day.
Third, EPA assumes that 100% of the material present on food
contact surfaces will migrate to food.
iii. Cancer. Sodium nitrate did not cause an increase in tumors in
rodents at doses up to 2,500 mg/kg/day. Therefore, based on the weight
of evidence, nitric acid is not likely to cause cancer in humans and a
cancer dietary exposure assessment is not necessary to assess cancer
risk.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The proposed use of nitric
acid will not result in its presence in surface water or ground water
and therefore not contribute to dietary exposure.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming
pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables).
Nitric acid is not used as an inert ingredient in pesticide
products that are registered for specific uses that may result in both
indoor and outdoor residential exposures. Therefore, a residential
exposure and risk assessment was not conducted for nitric acid.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found nitric acid to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and nitric acid does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
nitric acid 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 Food Quality
Protection Act (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. There is no concern for
fetal susceptibility. There were no treatment related effects observed
in the 2-generation reproduction study in rabbits. Also, the FDA
sponsored several reproductive and developmental studies in rodents,
hamsters and rabbits treated with sodium nitrate. No adverse effects
were observed in maternal reproductive parameters nor was there
fetotoxicity or fetal malformations up to the maximum doses tested in
each species (41 mg/kg/day in mice and hamsters and 66 mg/kg/day in
rats and rabbits). Fetal susceptibility was not observed in these any
of these studies. Therefore, there are no concerns for residual
uncertainties concerning prenatal and postnatal toxicity.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for nitric acid is adequate as it is based
on the use of sodium nitrate data for which there is a robust toxicity
database. The NOAEL used for risk assessment was derived from the
critical toxic effect in the most sensitive human subpopulation
(infants age 8 days to 5 months).
ii. There is no indication that nitric acid 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 indication that nitric acid is a immunotoxic
chemical and there is no need additional UFs to account for
immunotoxicity.
iv. There is no evidence that nitric acid results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rodents. Several reproductive and
developmental studies in rodents, hamsters and rabbits showed no
evidence of increased fetal susceptibility at doses as high as 41 mg/
kg/day in mice and hamsters and 66 mg/kg/day in rats and rabbits.
Further, although effects in infants were found in an epidemiological
study, the cRfD (1.6 mg/kg/day) is based on a clear NOAEL established
in that study.
v. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions regarding
dietary exposure to nitric acid. This assessment will not underestimate
the exposure and risks posed by nitric acid.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the aPAD and cPAD.
The aPAD and cPAD represent the highest safe exposures, taking into
account all appropriate SFs. EPA calculates the aPAD and cPAD by
dividing the POD by all applicable UFs. For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the probability of additional cancer cases 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 POD to ensure that the MOE called for
by the product of all applicable UFs is not exceeded.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
nitric acid is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
nitric acid from dietary exposure will utilize 24% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for nitric acid.
[[Page 53149]]
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
Because no short-term adverse effect was identified, nitric acid is
not expected to pose a short-term risk.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
Because no intermediate-term adverse effect was identified, nitric
acid is not expected to pose an intermediate-term risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
nitric acid is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to nitric acid residues under reasonably foreseeable
circumstances. Therefore, the establishment of an exemption from
tolerance under 40 CFR 180.940(a) for residues of nitric acid when used
as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations applied to food-
contact surfaces in public eating places, dairy processing equipment,
and food-processing equipment and utensils at a maximum level in the
end-use concentration of 1,000 ppm, is safe under FFDCA section 408.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency 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. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. Food and
Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards
program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established a MRL for nitric acid.
VI. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established under 40 CFR 180.940(a) for nitric acid (CAS No. 7697-37-2)
when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations applied to
food-contact surfaces in public eating places, dairy processing
equipment, and food-processing equipment and utensils at a maximum
level in the end-use concentration of 1,000 ppm.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of
FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note).
VIII. 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 17, 2012.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
0
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:
[[Page 53150]]
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. In Sec. 180.940(a), the table is amended by adding alphabetically
the following inert ingredient to read as follows:
Sec. 180.940 Tolerance exemptions for active and inert ingredients
for use in antimicrobial formulations (Food-contact surface sanitizing
solutions).
* * * * *
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pesticide chemical CAS Reg. No. Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Nitric acid.................... 7697-37-2 When ready for use, the
end-use concentration
is not to exceed 1,000
ppm.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-21354 Filed 8-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P