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
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.