Pyraflufen-ethyl; Pesticide Tolerances, 13257-13264 [2013-04555]
Download as PDF
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this final rule
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This final rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.,) do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
and food retailers, not States or tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this final rule. In addition, this final
rule does not impose any enforceable
duty or contain any unfunded mandate
as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Feb 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), 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 the rule in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
13257
(difluoromethoxy)-3-(trifluoromethyl)1H-pyrazol-4-yl]methanesulfonic acid
(M–25); and 3-[1-carboxy-2-(5,5dimethyl-4,5-dihydroisoxazol-3ylthio)ethylamino]-3-oxopropanoic acid
(M–28), calculated as the stoichiometric
equivalent of pyroxasulfone, in or on
the commodity.
Parts per
million
Commodity
Soybean, seed ............................
*
*
*
*
0.06
*
[FR Doc. 2013–04559 Filed 2–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Dated: February 20, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Pyraflufen-ethyl; Pesticide Tolerances
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–1002; FRL–9379–6]
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of pyraflufen■ 1. The authority citation for part 180
ethyl in or on multiple commodities
continues to read as follows:
which are identified and discussed later
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
in this document. Nichino America, Inc.
requested these tolerances under the
■ 2. In § 180.659:
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
■ a. Add alphabetically the following
(FFDCA).
commodities to the table in paragraph
(a)(2).
DATES: This regulation is effective
■ b. Add a new paragraph (a)(3).
February 27, 2013. Objections and
The additions read as follows.
requests for hearings must be received
on or before April 29, 2013, and must
§ 180.659 Pyroxasulfone; tolerances for
be filed in accordance with the
residues.
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
(a) * * *
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
(2) * * *
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
Parts per
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,
Commodity
million
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–1002, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
*
*
*
*
*
Soybean, forage .........................
1.0 or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Soybean, hay ..............................
2.0 Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket)
in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West
(3) Tolerances are established for
residues of the herbicide pyroxasulfone, Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. The
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities in Public Reading Room is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
the table below. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified below is to be Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public
determined by measuring only the sum
Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and
of pyroxasulfone, 3-[[[5the telephone number for the OPP
(difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-3Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
(trifluoromethyl)-1H-pyrazol-4the visitor instructions and additional
yl]methyl]sulfonyl]-4,5-dihydro-5,5information about the docket available
dimethylisoxazole, and its metabolites,
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
5-(difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-3(trifluoromethyl)-1H-pyrazol-4FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
carboxylic acid (M–3); [5Bethany Benbow, Registration Division
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
13258
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 347–8072; email address:
benbow.bethany@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. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• 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 EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2011–1002 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before April 29, 2013. 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 (excluding
any Confidential Business Information
(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket.
Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Feb 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior
notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your
objection or hearing request, identified
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2011–1002, 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), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
Additional instructions on commenting
or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is
available at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
milk and the meat by-products of cattle,
goat, horse, and sheep at 0.02 ppm are
being revised to permanent tolerances
for combined residues of pyraflufenethyl and metabolites E–1 and E–9 at
0.03 ppm. Finally, permanent tolerances
for combined residues of pyraflufenethyl and metabolites E–1 and E–9 are
also being set for the fat and meat of
cattle, goat, horse, and sheep at 0.03
ppm. The reasons for these changes are
explained in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
residential settings, but does not include
Tolerance
occupational exposure. Section
In the Federal Register of March 14,
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
2012 (77 FR 15012) (FRL–9335–9), EPA
give special consideration to exposure
issued a document pursuant to FFDCA
of infants and children to the pesticide
section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3),
chemical residue in establishing a
announcing the filing of a pesticide
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
petition (PP 1F7944) by Nichino
reasonable certainty that no harm will
America, Inc., 4550 New Linden Hill
result to infants and children from
Road Suite 501, Wilmington, DE 19808. aggregate exposure to the pesticide
The petition requested that 40 CFR
chemical residue. * * *’’
180.585 be amended by establishing
Consistent with FFDCA section
tolerances for residues of the herbicide
408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in
pyraflufen-ethyl, ethyl 2-[2-chloro-5-(4FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has
chloro-5-difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-1H- reviewed the available scientific data
pyrazol-3-yl]-4-fluorophenoxy] acetate
and other relevant information in
and its acid metabolite, E–1, 2-chloro-5- support of this action. EPA has
(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy-1-methylsufficient data to assess the hazards of
1H-pyrazol-3-yl)-4-fluorophenoxyacetic and to make a determination on
acid, expressed in terms of the parent,
aggregate exposure for pyraflufen-ethyl
in or on hop, dried cone at 0.01 parts
including exposure resulting from the
per million (ppm); peanut at 0.01 ppm;
tolerances established by this action.
peanut, hay at 0.07 ppm; peanut, meal
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
at 0.01 ppm; and peanut, refined oil at
associated with pyraflufen-ethyl
0.01 ppm. That document referenced a
follows.
summary of the petition prepared by
A. Toxicological Profile
Nichino America, Inc., the registrant,
EPA has evaluated the available
which is available in the docket,
https://www.regulations.gov. There were toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
no comments received in response to
the relationship of the results of the
the notice of filing.
studies to human risk. EPA has also
Based upon review of the data
considered available information
supporting the petition, EPA is
concerning the variability of the
establishing tolerances for peanut and
sensitivities of major identifiable
peanut, hay but not establishing
subgroups of consumers, including
tolerances for hop, dried cone; peanut,
meal; or peanut, refined oil. In addition, infants and children. Pyraflufen-ethyl
exhibits relatively low acute toxicity
the current time-limited tolerances
from oral, dermal, and inhalation
established for combined residues of
exposure. It produces moderate eye
pyraflufen-ethyl and metabolite E–1 in
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
irritation and is not a dermal irritant or
a dermal sensitizer. Following repeated
short-term and chronic oral dosing, the
liver, kidney, and hematopoietic system
are the target organs for pyraflufen-ethyl
in the rat and/or mouse. The rabbit
appears to be the most sensitive species
in the toxicity database with adverse
effects, including mortality. Adverse
effects were not noted in the dog
following oral exposure or in the rat
following dermal exposure. There was
no evidence of increased susceptibility
following pre-natal exposure to rats and
rabbits in the developmental toxicity
studies or following pre- and post-natal
exposure to rats in the multi-generation
reproduction study. Although not
mutagenic in the mutagenicity battery or
carcinogenic in the rat, pyraflufen-ethyl
is classified as ‘‘Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans’’ due to a
compound-related increase in incidence
of hepatocellular adenomas,
carcinomas, and/or hepatoblastomas in
male and female mice. A linear lowdose extrapolation approach is used to
estimate human cancer risk (Q1*) based
on combined hepatocellular adenomas,
carcinomas, and/or hepatoblastomas
seen in male mice.
Since the last risk assessment, the
neurotoxicity battery was reviewed and
determined to be negative for both acute
and subchronic neurotoxicity.
Additionally, the Agency reviewed an
immunotoxicity study that showed a
decreased immune response (decreases
of anti-sheep red blood cell (SRBC)
antibody forming cell (AFC) response in
male rats), only at a dose level
approaching the limit dose.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by pyraflufen-ethyl as
well as the no observed adverse effect
levels (NOAELs) and the lowest
observed adverse effect levels (LOAELs)
from the toxicity studies can be found
at https://www.regulations.gov in
document Pyraflufen-ethyl—Human
Health Risk Assessment for a Section 3
Registration of New Food Uses on Hops
and Peanuts at pages 44–48 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–1002.
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
13259
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which no adverse effects are
observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for pyraflufen-ethyl used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR PYRAFLUFEN-ETHYL FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH
RISK ASSESSMENT
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety
factors
Exposure/scenario
Acute dietary (General population including infants and children).
RfD, PAD, LOC for risk assessment
None
Study and toxicological effects
An endpoint attributable to a single
dose was not identified for
pyraflufen-ethyl from the available
data.
Chronic dietary (All populations) .........
NOAEL = 20 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Chronic RfD = 0.20 mg/kg/day ...........
cPAD = 0.20 mg/kg/day.
Mouse carcinogenicity study.
LOAEL = 98 mg/kg/day based on liver
toxicity.
Incidental oral short-term (1 to 30
days).
NOAEL = 20 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 100 ............................
Developmental toxicity—rabbit.
Maternal LOAEL = 60 mg/kg/day
based on decreases in body weight
and food consumption, gastrointestinal (GI) observations, and
abortions.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days); Dermal intermediate-term (1 to 6
months).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Feb 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
None
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
28-day dermal toxicity—rats.
No dermal or systemic toxicity was
seen at the limit dose (1,000 mg/kg/
day).
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
13260
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR PYRAFLUFEN-ETHYL FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH
RISK ASSESSMENT—Continued
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety
factors
Exposure/scenario
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 days)
and Intermediate and long term (1–
6 months).
Inhalation (or oral)
study NOAEL = 20
mg/kg/day (inhalation absorption rate
= 100%).
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) ........
RfD, PAD, LOC for risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
Residential LOC for MOE = 100 .........
Developmental toxicity-rabbit.
LOAEL = 60 mg/kg/day based on decreases in body weight and food
consumption, GI observations, and
abortions.
Classification: ‘‘Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’ by the oral route. Q1* = 3.32 × 10¥2 (mg/kg/
day)¥1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day =
milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c =
chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in
sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to pyraflufen-ethyl, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing pyraflufen-ethyl tolerances in
40 CFR 180.585. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from pyraflufen-ethyl in food
as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide,
if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1-day or single
exposure. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies
for pyraflufen-ethyl; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA) National Health
and Nutrition Examination Survey,
What We Eat in America (NHANES/
WWEIA). As to residue levels in food,
EPA incorporated all current and
proposed tolerances for combined
residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and
metabolite E–1 in plants and residues of
pyraflufen-ethyl, metabolite E–1 and
metabolite E–9 in animals and assumed
100% of crops were treated. The
commodities of corn, wheat, soybeans,
cottonseed, potatoes, pome fruit, stone
fruit, pomegranates, olives, grapes, tree
nuts, and pistachios were analyzed at 1⁄2
the combined levels of quantitation
(LOQs) of the parent and metabolites for
the residue values in the dietary
assessment because the field trials
showed that residues were lower than
the LOQ. All other established and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Feb 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
proposed commodities were analyzed
using tolerance-level residues. Because
the commodity-specific processing
studies did not show pyraflufen-ethyl
concentration after processing, the
chronic dietary exposure assessment did
not incorporate processing factors for
the following commodities: Treated
corn grain, soybean seeds, wheat grain,
apples, and grapes. However, default
processing factors were used for dry
potatoes (6.5X), peanut butter (1.89X),
dried beef (1.92X), and corn syrup
(1.5X). An empirical processing factor of
0.6X was used for cotton seed oil. The
anticipated residue in meat, milk, fat,
and meat byproducts was calculated to
be 0.001 ppm. Chronic (non-cancer)
dietary exposure from drinking water
was determined based on a Tier 2
(surface water) drinking water estimate
provided by the Environmental Fate and
Effects Division (EFED). The chronic
(annual average) estimate for drinking
water was incorporated directly into the
dietary assessment for the combined
residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and its
metabolic products, E–1, E–2, and E–3,
which are the major residues present in
the supporting studies.
iii. Cancer. Pyraflufen-ethyl is
classified as ‘‘Likely to be Carcinogenic
to Humans’’ by the oral route; therefore,
a cancer dietary risk assessment was
conducted. EPA determines whether
quantitative cancer exposure and risk
assessments are appropriate for a fooduse pesticide based on the weight of the
evidence from cancer studies and other
relevant data. If quantitative cancer risk
assessment is appropriate, cancer risk
may be quantified using a linear or
nonlinear approach. If sufficient
information on the carcinogenic mode
of action is available, a threshold or
nonlinear approach is used and a cancer
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
RfD is calculated based on an earlier
noncancer key event. If carcinogenic
mode of action data are not available, or
if the mode of action data determines a
mutagenic mode of action, a default
linear cancer slope factor approach is
utilized. Based on the data summarized
in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that
pyraflufen-ethyl should be classified as
‘‘Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’
and a linear approach has been used to
quantify cancer risk.
All exposure inputs for the cancer
assessment were the same as for the
chronic dietary exposure assessment,
except the estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWC). A Tier 2
drinking water (surface water) of a (30year average) estimate for pyraflufenethyl and its metabolic products, E–1,
E–2, and E–3, was incorporated directly
into the dietary assessment to estimate
chronic carcinogenic risk from drinking
water containing pyraflufen-ethyl.
iv. Anticipated residue information.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA
authorizes EPA to use available data and
information on the anticipated residue
levels of pesticide residues in food and
the actual levels of pesticide residues
that have been measured in food. If EPA
relies on such information, EPA must
require pursuant to FFDCA section
408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years
after the tolerance is established,
modified, or left in effect, demonstrating
that the levels in food are not above the
levels anticipated. For the present
action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
as are required by FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be
required to be submitted no later than
5 years from the date of issuance of
these tolerances.
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for pyraflufen-ethyl in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
pyraflufen-ethyl. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI–
GROW) models, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of
pyraflufen-ethyl acute exposures are
estimated to be 0.640 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 0.0018 ppb
for ground water. The estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)
of pyraflufen-ethyl for non-cancer
chronic exposures are estimated to be
0.295 ppb for surface water and 0.0018
ppb for ground water. The EDWCs of
pyraflufen-ethyl for chronic exposures
for cancer assessments are estimated to
be 0.268 ppb for surface water and
0.0018 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration of value 0.295 ppb
was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For cancer dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 0.268 ppb was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
Pyraflufen-ethyl is currently
registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures:
Established ornamental turf lawns
(residential, industrial, and
institutional), parks, cemeteries, athletic
fields, golf courses, sod farms, nurseries,
ornamental plantings, and Christmas
trees. EPA assessed residential handler
exposure using the following
assumptions: (1) Most residential uses
will result in short-term (1–30 day)
exposures, (2) residential handlers are
assumed to be wearing short-sleeved
shirts, short pants, shoes, and socks
during pyraflufen-ethyl application, (3)
various application methods may be
used such as manually pressurized
handwands, backpack sprayers, and
hose-end sprayers.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Feb 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
When determining the potential for
residential post-application exposure,
the Agency considers residues from leaf
to skin/hand residue transfer, children’s
hand-to-mouth transfer, and exposure
time. Because exposure to treated
gardens and turf could be expected
within the same day, adult postapplication cancer exposure to treated
trees and retail plants and turf were
combined. The exposure assessment for
treated plants is considered extremely
conservative in that the plants are
assumed to be treated the same day that
residential post-application contact
occurs, with no residue transfer between
treatment and purchase of the plants.
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at https://www.epa.gov/opp00001/
science/USEPA-OPP-HED_Residential
%20SOPs_Oct2012.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’ EPA has not
found pyraflufen-ethyl to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and pyraflufenethyl does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite which is also produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that pyraflufen-ethyl does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity
with other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13261
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There is no evidence of increased
susceptibility of rat or rabbit fetuses
following in utero exposure in the
developmental studies with pyraflufenethyl. There is no evidence of increased
susceptibility of young rats in the
pyraflufen-ethyl reproduction study and
there are no residual uncertainties for
pre- and/or postnatal exposure.
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 pyraflufenethyl is complete.
ii. There is no indication that
pyraflufen-ethyl is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
pyraflufen-ethyl results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100% crop
treated (CT) and tolerance-level residues
for the proposed commodities, and
residue inputs of 1⁄2 LOQ as refined
estimates of the currently registered
commodities. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground
and surface water modeling used to
assess exposure to pyraflufen-ethyl in
drinking water. EPA used similarly
conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure of adults and
children as well as incidental oral
exposure of children. In addition, the
residential exposure assessment is based
on the updated 2012 Residential
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)
employing surrogate study data,
including conservative exposure
assumptions based on day 0 dermal/oral
contact to turf and surfaces treated at
the maximum application rate. These
data are reliable and are not expected to
underestimate risks to adults or
children. The Residential SOPs are
based upon reasonable ‘‘worst-case’’
assumptions and are not expected to
underestimate risk. Although some of
the residue values used in the dietary
exposure assessment were refined, these
assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by pyraflufenethyl.
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
13262
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. 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, pyraflufen-ethyl 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 pyraflufenethyl from food and water will utilize
< 1% of the cPAD for children 1–2 years
old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the
explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic
residential exposure to residues of
pyraflufen-ethyl is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Pyraflufen-ethyl is
currently registered for uses that could
result in short-term residential
exposure, and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with short-term residential
exposures to pyraflufen-ethyl.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined chronic dietary and shortterm residential exposures result in an
adult (inhalation) non-cancer aggregate
MOE of 290,000. The aggregate MOE for
children 1–2 years old, including
incidental oral exposures from treated
turf, is 9,600. Because EPA’s level of
concern for pyraflufen-ethyl is a MOE of
100 or below, these MOEs are not of
concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:19 Feb 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
to be a background exposure level). An
intermediate-term adverse effect was
identified; however, pyraflufen-ethyl is
not registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on intermediateterm residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure
and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for
pyraflufen-ethyl.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. The aggregate cancer risk
assessment for the general U.S.
population considers exposure
estimates from dietary consumption of
pyraflufen-ethyl in food and drinking
water and exposure through residential
uses of pyraflufen-ethyl. Exposures from
residential uses are based on the
lifetime average daily dose and assume
an exposure period of 2 days per year
and 35 years of exposure over a 78 year
lifetime. Average food and water
exposure to pyraflufen-ethyl was used
in the aggregate assessment. Estimated
cancer risk for the general U.S.
population includes infants and
children; therefore, a children’s cancer
risk estimate was not reported
separately. The aggregate cancer risk
estimate for pyraflufen-ethyl is 2.6 ×
10 ¥6. EPA generally considers cancer
risks in the range of one in one million
(1 × 10 ¥6) or less to be negligible. The
precision that can be assumed for cancer
risk estimates is best described by
rounding to the nearest integral order of
magnitude on the log scale; for example,
risks falling between 3 × 10 ¥7 and 3 ×
10 ¥6 are expressed as risks in the range
of 10¥6. Considering the precision with
which cancer hazard can be estimated,
the conservativeness of low-dose linear
extrapolation, and the rounding
procedure just described, cancer risk
should generally not be assumed to
exceed the benchmark level of concern
of the range of 10 ¥6 until the calculated
risk exceeds approximately 3 × 10 ¥6.
This is particularly the case where some
conservatism is maintained in the
exposure assessment. Although the
pyraflufen-ethyl exposure risk
assessment is somewhat refined, it
retains significant conservatism due,
among other things, to the assumption
that 100% of registered crops are treated
in the dietary cancer assessment and
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
100% dermal absorption was assumed
in the residential exposure cancer
assessment. Accordingly, EPA has
concluded the cancer risk for all
existing pyraflufen-ethyl uses and the
uses associated with the tolerances
established in this action falls within
the range of 1 × 10 ¥6 to 3 × 10 ¥6 and
is thus negligible. Therefore, the
aggregate cancer risk estimate from
pyraflufen-ethyl residues in food and
drinking water is not of concern for the
general U.S. population.
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 pyraflufenethyl residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(gas chromatography-mass spectrometry
(GC/MS)) is available to enforce the
tolerance expression.
The method may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;
telephone number: (410) 305–2905;
email address: residue
methods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
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 pyraflufen-ethyl.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
Based on a lack of adequate residue
data, the Agency is not granting
tolerances for hops at this time. As
permitted under 40 CFR 180.8, the
petitioner has withdrawn its request for
hop, dried cone tolerances.
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
In addition, the requested tolerances
for peanut, meal and peanut, refined oil
are not being granted since those
residues will be covered by the
proposed tolerance for peanut. Because
peanut hay is fed to livestock and may
affect residue levels, upon review of the
data supporting the petitions, EPA
determined that several livestock
tolerances should be revised (from
residues of the parent and metabolite E1 in milk and meat by-products of cattle,
goat, horse, and sheep at 0.02 ppm to
residues of the parent and metabolites
E-1 and E-9 at 0.03 ppm) and several
new livestock tolerances should be
established (residues of the parent and
metabolites E-1 and E-9 in the fat and
meat of cattle, goat, horse and sheep at
0.03 ppm). The Agency revised these
tolerance levels based on analysis of the
residue field trial data using the
Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD) tolerance
calculation.
Finally, based on data submitted with
this petition, EPA is removing the timelimitations for these tolerances.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, permanent tolerances are
established for the combined residues of
pyraflufen-ethyl, metabolite E-1, and
metabolite E-9 in or on (cattle, goat,
horse, sheep) fat, meat, and meat byproducts at 0.03 ppm; milk at 0.03 ppm;
and new tolerances are established for
the combined residues of pyraflufenethyl and metabolite E-1 in or on peanut
at 0.01 ppm; and peanut, hay at 0.07
ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this final rule
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This final rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require
any special considerations under
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Feb 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
and food retailers, not States or tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this final rule. In addition, this final
rule does not impose any enforceable
duty or contain any unfunded mandate
as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
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) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), 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 the rule in the Federal
Register. This action 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
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13263
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: February 20, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.585, revise paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
■
§ 180.585 Pyraflufen-ethyl; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of the herbicide,
pyraflufen-ethyl, including its
metabolites and degradates, in the
commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the plant commodity
tolerance levels specified in the table is
to be determined by measuring only the
sum of the parent pyraflufen-ethyl, ethyl
2-[2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazol3-yl]-4-fluorophenoxy] acetate, and its
acid metabolite, E–1, 2-chloro-5-(4chloro-5-difluoromethoxy-1-methyl-1Hpyrazol-3-yl)-4-fluorophenoxyacetic
acid, calculated as the stoichiometric
equivalent of pyraflufen-ethyl in or on
the commodity. Compliance with the
livestock commodity tolerance levels
specified in the table is to be
determined by measuring only the sum
of the parent pyraflufen-ethyl, ethyl 2[2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazol3-yl]-4-fluorophenoxy] acetate and its
acid metabolites: E–1, 2-chloro-5-(4chloro-5-difluoromethoxy-1-methyl-1Hpyrazol-3-yl)-4-fluorophenoxyacetic
acid, and E–9, 2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5difluoromethoxy-1H-pyrazol-3-yl)-4fluorophenoxyacetic acid, both
calculated as the stoichiometric
equivalent of pyraflufen-ethyl in or on
the commodity.
Commodity
Almond, hulls ..............................
Cattle, fat ....................................
Cattle, meat ................................
Cattle, meat byproducts .............
Corn, field, forage .......................
Corn, field, grain .........................
Corn, field, stover .......................
Cotton, gin byproducts ...............
Cotton, undelinted seed .............
Fruit, pome, group 11–10 ...........
Fruit, stone, group 12 .................
Goat, fat ......................................
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
Parts per
million
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.01
1.5
0.04
0.01
0.01
0.03
13264
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Parts per
million
Commodity
Goat, meat ..................................
Goat, meat byproducts ...............
Grape ..........................................
Grass, forage, group 17 .............
Grass, hay, group 17 ..................
Horse, fat ....................................
Horse, meat ................................
Horse, meat byproducts .............
Milk .............................................
Nut, tree, group 14 .....................
Olive ............................................
Peanut ........................................
Peanut, hay ................................
Pistachio .....................................
Pomegranate ..............................
Potato .........................................
Sheep, fat ...................................
Sheep, meat ...............................
Sheep, meat byproducts ............
Soybean, forage .........................
Soybean, hay ..............................
Soybean, seed ............................
Wheat, forage .............................
Wheat, grain ...............................
Wheat, hay .................................
Wheat, straw ...............................
*
*
*
*
0.03
0.03
0.01
1.0
1.4
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.07
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.05
0.10
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
*
[FR Doc. 2013–04555 Filed 2–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0302; FRL–9377–6]
Acetochlor; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This regulation amends
inadvertent tolerances for residues of
acetochlor in or on crop groups 15 and
16 for cereal grains by dropping the
exclusion for rice grain and straw.
Monsanto Company requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
February 27, 2013. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before April 29, 2013 and must be
filed in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also
Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION).
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0302, is
available at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the
Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the
Environmental Protection Agency
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Feb 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West
Bldg., 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:
Hope Johnson, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–5410; email address:
johnson.hope@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. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• 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 EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/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
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2012–0302 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before April 29, 2013. 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 (excluding
any Confidential Business Information
(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 the non-CBI copy of your
objection or hearing request, identified
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2012–0302, 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 CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of July 25,
2012 (77 FR 43562) (FRL–9353–6), EPA
issued a document pursuant to FFDCA
section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3),
announcing the filing of a pesticide
petition (PP 2F7996) by Monsanto
Company, 1300 I St. NW., Suite 450
East, Washington, DC 20005. The
petition requested revisions to the
current tolerances for residues of the
herbicide acetochlor, 2-chloro-2′methyl-6′-ethyl-Nethoxymethylacetanilide and its
metabolites containing either the 2ethyl-6-methylaniline (EMA) or the 2-(1hydroxyethyl)-6-methyl-aniline (HEMA)
moiety, at 40 CFR 180.470 for grain,
cereal, group 15, except corn, grain
sorghum, rice, and wheat, grain and
grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw,
group 16, except corn, grain sorghum,
rice and wheat, straw.
Specifically the petition requested
that crop groups 15 and 16 be amended
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 39 (Wednesday, February 27, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13257-13264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04555]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1002; FRL-9379-6]
Pyraflufen-ethyl; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
pyraflufen-ethyl in or on multiple commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. Nichino America, Inc. requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective February 27, 2013. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 29, 2013, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1002, is available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West Bldg., 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: Bethany Benbow, Registration Division
[[Page 13258]]
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 347-8072; email address: benbow.bethany@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.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
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 EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1002 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
April 29, 2013. 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 (excluding any Confidential Business Information (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 the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1002, 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), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of March 14, 2012 (77 FR 15012) (FRL-9335-
9), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
1F7944) by Nichino America, Inc., 4550 New Linden Hill Road Suite 501,
Wilmington, DE 19808. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.585 be
amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide
pyraflufen-ethyl, ethyl 2-[2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy)-1-
methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-yl]-4-fluorophenoxy] acetate and its acid
metabolite, E-1, 2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy-1-methyl-1H-
pyrazol-3-yl)-4-fluorophenoxyacetic acid, expressed in terms of the
parent, in or on hop, dried cone at 0.01 parts per million (ppm);
peanut at 0.01 ppm; peanut, hay at 0.07 ppm; peanut, meal at 0.01 ppm;
and peanut, refined oil at 0.01 ppm. That document referenced a summary
of the petition prepared by Nichino America, Inc., the registrant,
which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There
were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing tolerances for peanut and peanut, hay but not establishing
tolerances for hop, dried cone; peanut, meal; or peanut, refined oil.
In addition, the current time-limited tolerances established for
combined residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and metabolite E-1 in milk and
the meat by-products of cattle, goat, horse, and sheep at 0.02 ppm are
being revised to permanent tolerances for combined residues of
pyraflufen-ethyl and metabolites E-1 and E-9 at 0.03 ppm. Finally,
permanent tolerances for combined residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and
metabolites E-1 and E-9 are also being set for the fat and meat of
cattle, goat, horse, and sheep at 0.03 ppm. The reasons for these
changes are explained in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. * *
*''
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for pyraflufen-ethyl including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with pyraflufen-
ethyl follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Pyraflufen-ethyl exhibits relatively low acute toxicity from
oral, dermal, and inhalation exposure. It produces moderate eye
[[Page 13259]]
irritation and is not a dermal irritant or a dermal sensitizer.
Following repeated short-term and chronic oral dosing, the liver,
kidney, and hematopoietic system are the target organs for pyraflufen-
ethyl in the rat and/or mouse. The rabbit appears to be the most
sensitive species in the toxicity database with adverse effects,
including mortality. Adverse effects were not noted in the dog
following oral exposure or in the rat following dermal exposure. There
was no evidence of increased susceptibility following pre-natal
exposure to rats and rabbits in the developmental toxicity studies or
following pre- and post-natal exposure to rats in the multi-generation
reproduction study. Although not mutagenic in the mutagenicity battery
or carcinogenic in the rat, pyraflufen-ethyl is classified as ``Likely
to be Carcinogenic to Humans'' due to a compound-related increase in
incidence of hepatocellular adenomas, carcinomas, and/or
hepatoblastomas in male and female mice. A linear low-dose
extrapolation approach is used to estimate human cancer risk
(Q1*) based on combined hepatocellular adenomas, carcinomas,
and/or hepatoblastomas seen in male mice.
Since the last risk assessment, the neurotoxicity battery was
reviewed and determined to be negative for both acute and subchronic
neurotoxicity. Additionally, the Agency reviewed an immunotoxicity
study that showed a decreased immune response (decreases of anti-sheep
red blood cell (SRBC) antibody forming cell (AFC) response in male
rats), only at a dose level approaching the limit dose.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by pyraflufen-ethyl as well as the no observed
adverse effect levels (NOAELs) and the lowest observed adverse effect
levels (LOAELs) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document Pyraflufen-ethyl--Human Health Risk
Assessment for a Section 3 Registration of New Food Uses on Hops and
Peanuts at pages 44-48 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1002.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for pyraflufen-ethyl used
for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Pyraflufen-ethyl for Use in Human Health Risk
Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Study and
Exposure/scenario Point of departure and RfD, PAD, LOC for toxicological
uncertainty/safety factors risk assessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (General population None An endpoint
including infants and children). attributable to a
single dose was not
identified for
pyraflufen-ethyl
from the available
data.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations). NOAEL = 20 mg/kg/day............ Chronic RfD = 0.20 Mouse
UFA = 10x....................... mg/kg/day. carcinogenicity
UFH = 10x....................... cPAD = 0.20 mg/kg/ study.
FQPA SF = 1x.................... day.. LOAEL = 98 mg/kg/day
based on liver
toxicity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidental oral short-term (1 to NOAEL = 20 mg/kg/day............ LOC for MOE = 100... Developmental
30 days). UFA = 10x....................... toxicity--rabbit.
UFH = 10x....................... Maternal LOAEL = 60
FQPA SF = 1x.................... mg/kg/day based on
decreases in body
weight and food
consumption,
gastrointestinal
(GI) observations,
and abortions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days); None 28-day dermal
Dermal intermediate-term (1 to 6 toxicity--rats.
months). No dermal or
systemic toxicity
was seen at the
limit dose (1,000
mg/kg/day).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 13260]]
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 Inhalation (or oral) study NOAEL Residential LOC for Developmental
days) and Intermediate and long = 20 mg/kg/day (inhalation MOE = 100. toxicity-rabbit.
term (1-6 months). absorption rate = 100%). LOAEL = 60 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x....................... based on decreases
UFH = 10x....................... in body weight and
FQPA SF = 1x.................... food consumption,
GI observations,
and abortions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation). Classification: ``Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans'' by the oral route.
Q1* = 3.32 x 10-2 (mg/kg/day)-1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. LOC = level
of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no observed adverse effect
level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor.
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among
members of the human population (intraspecies).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to pyraflufen-ethyl, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing pyraflufen-ethyl
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.585. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
pyraflufen-ethyl in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies for pyraflufen-ethyl;
therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is
unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the U.S. Department
of Agriculture's (USDA) National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in
food, EPA incorporated all current and proposed tolerances for combined
residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and metabolite E-1 in plants and residues
of pyraflufen-ethyl, metabolite E-1 and metabolite E-9 in animals and
assumed 100% of crops were treated. The commodities of corn, wheat,
soybeans, cottonseed, potatoes, pome fruit, stone fruit, pomegranates,
olives, grapes, tree nuts, and pistachios were analyzed at \1/2\ the
combined levels of quantitation (LOQs) of the parent and metabolites
for the residue values in the dietary assessment because the field
trials showed that residues were lower than the LOQ. All other
established and proposed commodities were analyzed using tolerance-
level residues. Because the commodity-specific processing studies did
not show pyraflufen-ethyl concentration after processing, the chronic
dietary exposure assessment did not incorporate processing factors for
the following commodities: Treated corn grain, soybean seeds, wheat
grain, apples, and grapes. However, default processing factors were
used for dry potatoes (6.5X), peanut butter (1.89X), dried beef
(1.92X), and corn syrup (1.5X). An empirical processing factor of 0.6X
was used for cotton seed oil. The anticipated residue in meat, milk,
fat, and meat byproducts was calculated to be 0.001 ppm. Chronic (non-
cancer) dietary exposure from drinking water was determined based on a
Tier 2 (surface water) drinking water estimate provided by the
Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED). The chronic (annual
average) estimate for drinking water was incorporated directly into the
dietary assessment for the combined residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and
its metabolic products, E-1, E-2, and E-3, which are the major residues
present in the supporting studies.
iii. Cancer. Pyraflufen-ethyl is classified as ``Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans'' by the oral route; therefore, a cancer dietary
risk assessment was conducted. EPA determines whether quantitative
cancer exposure and risk assessments are appropriate for a food-use
pesticide based on the weight of the evidence from cancer studies and
other relevant data. If quantitative cancer risk assessment is
appropriate, cancer risk may be quantified using a linear or nonlinear
approach. If sufficient information on the carcinogenic mode of action
is available, a threshold or nonlinear approach is used and a cancer
RfD is calculated based on an earlier noncancer key event. If
carcinogenic mode of action data are not available, or if the mode of
action data determines a mutagenic mode of action, a default linear
cancer slope factor approach is utilized. Based on the data summarized
in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that pyraflufen-ethyl should be
classified as ``Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans'' and a linear
approach has been used to quantify cancer risk.
All exposure inputs for the cancer assessment were the same as for
the chronic dietary exposure assessment, except the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWC). A Tier 2 drinking water (surface water) of
a (30-year average) estimate for pyraflufen-ethyl and its metabolic
products, E-1, E-2, and E-3, was incorporated directly into the dietary
assessment to estimate chronic carcinogenic risk from drinking water
containing pyraflufen-ethyl.
iv. Anticipated residue information. Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA
authorizes EPA to use available data and information on the anticipated
residue levels of pesticide residues in food and the actual levels of
pesticide residues that have been measured in food. If EPA relies on
such information, EPA must require pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1)
that data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is established,
modified, or left in effect, demonstrating that the levels in food are
not above the levels anticipated. For the present action, EPA will
issue such data call-ins as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E)
and authorized under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to
be submitted no later than 5 years from the date of issuance of these
tolerances.
[[Page 13261]]
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for pyraflufen-ethyl in drinking water. These simulation
models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of pyraflufen-ethyl. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure
assessment can be found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
pyraflufen-ethyl acute exposures are estimated to be 0.640 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.0018 ppb for ground water. The
estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of pyraflufen-ethyl for
non-cancer chronic exposures are estimated to be 0.295 ppb for surface
water and 0.0018 ppb for ground water. The EDWCs of pyraflufen-ethyl
for chronic exposures for cancer assessments are estimated to be 0.268
ppb for surface water and 0.0018 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 0.295 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For cancer dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 0.268 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
Pyraflufen-ethyl is currently registered for the following uses
that could result in residential exposures: Established ornamental turf
lawns (residential, industrial, and institutional), parks, cemeteries,
athletic fields, golf courses, sod farms, nurseries, ornamental
plantings, and Christmas trees. EPA assessed residential handler
exposure using the following assumptions: (1) Most residential uses
will result in short-term (1-30 day) exposures, (2) residential
handlers are assumed to be wearing short-sleeved shirts, short pants,
shoes, and socks during pyraflufen-ethyl application, (3) various
application methods may be used such as manually pressurized handwands,
backpack sprayers, and hose-end sprayers.
When determining the potential for residential post-application
exposure, the Agency considers residues from leaf to skin/hand residue
transfer, children's hand-to-mouth transfer, and exposure time. Because
exposure to treated gardens and turf could be expected within the same
day, adult post-application cancer exposure to treated trees and retail
plants and turf were combined. The exposure assessment for treated
plants is considered extremely conservative in that the plants are
assumed to be treated the same day that residential post-application
contact occurs, with no residue transfer between treatment and purchase
of the plants. Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions
and generic inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www.epa.gov/opp00001/science/USEPA-OPP-HED_Residential%20SOPs_Oct2012.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' EPA has not found
pyraflufen-ethyl to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and pyraflufen-ethyl does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite which is also produced by other substances. For the purposes
of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that pyraflufen-
ethyl does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no evidence of
increased susceptibility of rat or rabbit fetuses following in utero
exposure in the developmental studies with pyraflufen-ethyl. There is
no evidence of increased susceptibility of young rats in the
pyraflufen-ethyl reproduction study and there are no residual
uncertainties for pre- and/or postnatal exposure.
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 pyraflufen-ethyl is complete.
ii. There is no indication that pyraflufen-ethyl is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that pyraflufen-ethyl results in
increased susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100% crop treated (CT) and tolerance-level residues for the proposed
commodities, and residue inputs of \1/2\ LOQ as refined estimates of
the currently registered commodities. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to pyraflufen-ethyl in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to assess post-application exposure
of adults and children as well as incidental oral exposure of children.
In addition, the residential exposure assessment is based on the
updated 2012 Residential Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) employing
surrogate study data, including conservative exposure assumptions based
on day 0 dermal/oral contact to turf and surfaces treated at the
maximum application rate. These data are reliable and are not expected
to underestimate risks to adults or children. The Residential SOPs are
based upon reasonable ``worst-case'' assumptions and are not expected
to underestimate risk. Although some of the residue values used in the
dietary exposure assessment were refined, these assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks posed by pyraflufen-ethyl.
[[Page 13262]]
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. 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,
pyraflufen-ethyl 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
pyraflufen-ethyl from food and water will utilize < 1% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
pyraflufen-ethyl is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Pyraflufen-
ethyl is currently registered for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is
appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with
short-term residential exposures to pyraflufen-ethyl.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined chronic dietary and
short-term residential exposures result in an adult (inhalation) non-
cancer aggregate MOE of 290,000. The aggregate MOE for children 1-2
years old, including incidental oral exposures from treated turf, is
9,600. Because EPA's level of concern for pyraflufen-ethyl is a MOE of
100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
pyraflufen-ethyl is not registered for any use patterns that would
result in intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus
chronic dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term
residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been
assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as
protective as the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA
relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating
intermediate-term risk for pyraflufen-ethyl.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. The aggregate cancer
risk assessment for the general U.S. population considers exposure
estimates from dietary consumption of pyraflufen-ethyl in food and
drinking water and exposure through residential uses of pyraflufen-
ethyl. Exposures from residential uses are based on the lifetime
average daily dose and assume an exposure period of 2 days per year and
35 years of exposure over a 78 year lifetime. Average food and water
exposure to pyraflufen-ethyl was used in the aggregate assessment.
Estimated cancer risk for the general U.S. population includes infants
and children; therefore, a children's cancer risk estimate was not
reported separately. The aggregate cancer risk estimate for pyraflufen-
ethyl is 2.6 x 10 -6. EPA generally considers cancer risks
in the range of one in one million (1 x 10 -6) or less to be
negligible. The precision that can be assumed for cancer risk estimates
is best described by rounding to the nearest integral order of
magnitude on the log scale; for example, risks falling between 3 x 10
-7 and 3 x 10 -6 are expressed as risks in the
range of 10-6. Considering the precision with which cancer
hazard can be estimated, the conservativeness of low-dose linear
extrapolation, and the rounding procedure just described, cancer risk
should generally not be assumed to exceed the benchmark level of
concern of the range of 10 -6 until the calculated risk
exceeds approximately 3 x 10 -6. This is particularly the
case where some conservatism is maintained in the exposure assessment.
Although the pyraflufen-ethyl exposure risk assessment is somewhat
refined, it retains significant conservatism due, among other things,
to the assumption that 100% of registered crops are treated in the
dietary cancer assessment and 100% dermal absorption was assumed in the
residential exposure cancer assessment. Accordingly, EPA has concluded
the cancer risk for all existing pyraflufen-ethyl uses and the uses
associated with the tolerances established in this action falls within
the range of 1 x 10 -6 to 3 x 10 -6 and is thus
negligible. Therefore, the aggregate cancer risk estimate from
pyraflufen-ethyl residues in food and drinking water is not of concern
for the general U.S. population.
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 pyraflufen-ethyl residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (gas chromatography-mass
spectrometry (GC/MS)) is available to enforce the tolerance expression.
The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international 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 pyraflufen-ethyl.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
Based on a lack of adequate residue data, the Agency is not
granting tolerances for hops at this time. As permitted under 40 CFR
180.8, the petitioner has withdrawn its request for hop, dried cone
tolerances.
[[Page 13263]]
In addition, the requested tolerances for peanut, meal and peanut,
refined oil are not being granted since those residues will be covered
by the proposed tolerance for peanut. Because peanut hay is fed to
livestock and may affect residue levels, upon review of the data
supporting the petitions, EPA determined that several livestock
tolerances should be revised (from residues of the parent and
metabolite E-1 in milk and meat by-products of cattle, goat, horse, and
sheep at 0.02 ppm to residues of the parent and metabolites E-1 and E-9
at 0.03 ppm) and several new livestock tolerances should be established
(residues of the parent and metabolites E-1 and E-9 in the fat and meat
of cattle, goat, horse and sheep at 0.03 ppm). The Agency revised these
tolerance levels based on analysis of the residue field trial data
using the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
tolerance calculation.
Finally, based on data submitted with this petition, EPA is
removing the time-limitations for these tolerances.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, permanent tolerances are established for the combined
residues of pyraflufen-ethyl, metabolite E-1, and metabolite E-9 in or
on (cattle, goat, horse, sheep) fat, meat, and meat by-products at 0.03
ppm; milk at 0.03 ppm; and new tolerances are established for the
combined residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and metabolite E-1 in or on
peanut at 0.01 ppm; and peanut, hay at 0.07 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d)
in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has
been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule
is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain
any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
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) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
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
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 20, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. In Sec. 180.585, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.585 Pyraflufen-ethyl; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
herbicide, pyraflufen-ethyl, including its metabolites and degradates,
in the commodities in the table below. Compliance with the plant
commodity tolerance levels specified in the table is to be determined
by measuring only the sum of the parent pyraflufen-ethyl, ethyl 2-[2-
chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-yl]-4-
fluorophenoxy] acetate, and its acid metabolite, E-1, 2-chloro-5-(4-
chloro-5-difluoromethoxy-1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-yl)-4-
fluorophenoxyacetic acid, calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent
of pyraflufen-ethyl in or on the commodity. Compliance with the
livestock commodity tolerance levels specified in the table is to be
determined by measuring only the sum of the parent pyraflufen-ethyl,
ethyl 2-[2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-
yl]-4-fluorophenoxy] acetate and its acid metabolites: E-1, 2-chloro-5-
(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy-1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-yl)-4-
fluorophenoxyacetic acid, and E-9, 2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-
difluoromethoxy-1H-pyrazol-3-yl)-4-fluorophenoxyacetic acid, both
calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of pyraflufen-ethyl in or
on the commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almond, hulls............................................... 0.02
Cattle, fat................................................. 0.03
Cattle, meat................................................ 0.03
Cattle, meat byproducts..................................... 0.03
Corn, field, forage......................................... 0.01
Corn, field, grain.......................................... 0.01
Corn, field, stover......................................... 0.01
Cotton, gin byproducts...................................... 1.5
Cotton, undelinted seed..................................... 0.04
Fruit, pome, group 11-10.................................... 0.01
Fruit, stone, group 12...................................... 0.01
Goat, fat................................................... 0.03
[[Page 13264]]
Goat, meat.................................................. 0.03
Goat, meat byproducts....................................... 0.03
Grape....................................................... 0.01
Grass, forage, group 17..................................... 1.0
Grass, hay, group 17........................................ 1.4
Horse, fat.................................................. 0.03
Horse, meat................................................. 0.03
Horse, meat byproducts...................................... 0.03
Milk........................................................ 0.03
Nut, tree, group 14......................................... 0.01
Olive....................................................... 0.01
Peanut...................................................... 0.01
Peanut, hay................................................. 0.07
Pistachio................................................... 0.01
Pomegranate................................................. 0.01
Potato...................................................... 0.02
Sheep, fat.................................................. 0.03
Sheep, meat................................................. 0.03
Sheep, meat byproducts...................................... 0.03
Soybean, forage............................................. 0.05
Soybean, hay................................................ 0.10
Soybean, seed............................................... 0.01
Wheat, forage............................................... 0.02
Wheat, grain................................................ 0.01
Wheat, hay.................................................. 0.01
Wheat, straw................................................ 0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-04555 Filed 2-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P