Diisopropyl Adipate; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance, 33748-33754 [2013-13189]
Download as PDF
33748
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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).
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
16:07 Jun 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.665, add alphabetically the
following commodities to the table in
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
■
§ 180.665 Sedaxane; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Corn, field, forage .....................
Corn, field, grain .......................
Corn, field, stover .....................
Corn, pop, grain ........................
Corn, pop, stover ......................
Corn, sweet, forage ..................
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob
with husks removed ..............
Corn, sweet, stover ..................
*
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
*
*
*
*
Pea and bean, dried shelled,
except soybean, subgroup
6C ..........................................
Rapeseed, subgroup 20A .........
0.01
0.01
*
*
*
*
Sorghum, grain, forage .............
Sorghum, grain, grain ...............
Sorghum, grain, stover .............
*
0.01
0.01
0.01
*
*
*
*
Vegetable, foliage of legume,
except soybean, subgroup
7A ..........................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.01
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–13267 Filed 6–4–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Diisopropyl Adipate; Exemption From
the Requirement of a Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of diisopropyl
adipate when used as an inert
ingredient (solvent) in pesticide
formulations applied to pre- and postharvest crops under EPA regulations at
no more than 40% in formulated
products intended for mosquito control.
Wellmark International submitted a
petition prepared by Technology
Sciences Group Inc. to EPA under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), requesting establishment of an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance. This regulation eliminates the
need to establish a maximum
permissible level for residues of
diisopropyl adipate.
DATES: This regulation is effective June
5, 2013. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
August 5, 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–2012–0469, 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:
David Lieu, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
703–305–0079; email address:
Lieu.David@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0469; FRL–9387–8]
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Dated: May 29, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\05JNR1.SGM
05JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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).
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
through the Government Printing
Office’s e-CFR site at https://
www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl. To access the OCSPP test
guidelines referenced in this document
electronically, please go to https://
www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ‘‘Test
Methods and Guidelines.’’
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2012–0469 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 August 5, 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–
2012–0469, 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/
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:07 Jun 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
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.html.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Petition for Exemption
In the Federal Register of August 22,
2012 (77 FR 50661) (FRL–9358–9), EPA
issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA
section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a, announcing
the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
2E8031) by Wellmark International,
Central Life Sciences, 1501 East
Woodfield Road, Suite 200 West,
Schaumburg, IL 60173. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.920 be
amended by establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of diisopropyl adipate (CAS
Reg. No. 6938–94–9) when used as an
inert ingredient (solvent) in pesticide
formulations applied to growing crops
only at no more than 40% in formulated
products intended for mosquito control.
That document referenced a summary of
the petition prepared by Technology
Sciences Group Inc., the petitioner,
which is available in the docket,
https://www.regulations.gov. There were
no comments received in response to
the notice of filing. Based upon review
of the data supporting the petition, EPA
has modified the exemption requested
to include an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues
of diisopropyl adipate (CAS Reg. No.
6938–94–9) under 40 CFR 180.910 when
used as an inert ingredient in pesticide
formulations applied to growing crops
or to raw agricultural commodities after
harvest at no more than 40% in
formulated products intended for
mosquito control. The reason for these
changes is explained in Unit V.
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients
that are not active ingredients as defined
in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are
not limited to, the following types of
ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own):
Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as
polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and
diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose;
wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol
dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
33749
and emulsifiers. The term ‘‘inert’’ is not
intended to imply nontoxicity; the
ingredient may or may not be
chemically active. Generally, EPA has
exempted inert ingredients from the
requirement of a tolerance based on the
low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish an exemption
from the requirement for a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. . . .’’
EPA establishes exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance only in those
cases where it can be clearly
demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide
chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no
appreciable risks to human health. In
order to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the
toxicity of the inert in conjunction with
possible exposure to residues of the
inert ingredient through food, drinking
water, and through other exposures that
occur as a result of pesticide use in
residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a finite tolerance is not
necessary to ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be
established.
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(c)(2)(A), and the factors specified in
FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
E:\FR\FM\05JNR1.SGM
05JNR1
33750
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
aggregate exposure for diisopropyl
adipate including exposure resulting
from the exemption established by this
action. EPA’s assessment of exposures
and risks associated with diisopropyl
adipate follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as
well as the relationship of the results of
the studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children. Specific
information on the studies received and
the nature of the adverse effects caused
by diisopropyl adipate as well as the noobserved-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL)
and the lowest-observed-adverse-effectlevel (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies
are discussed in this unit.
The acute oral toxicity of diisopropyl
adipate in rodents, as expressed as an
LD50, ranges from 1,500 mg/kg to 8,800
mg/kg. In the guinea pig, the acute oral
toxicity of diisopropyl adipate is about
6,600 mg/kg and in the rabbit, 5,000 mg/
kg. In the dog, the acute oral LD50 of
diisopropyl adipate is greater than 8,000
mg/kg. Diisopropyl adipate is minimally
irritating to the eyes and skin of rabbits.
The potential for toxicity following
repeat dose exposure to diisopropyl
adipate was evaluated based on toxicity
studies with diisopropyl adipate as well
as toxicity data on the two primary
metabolites of diisopropyl adipate,
adipic acid (CAS Reg. No. 124–04–9)
and isopropyl alcohol (CAS Reg. No.
67–63–0). Isopropyl alcohol was
previously assessed in the U.S. EPA
inert reassessment document titled,
Inert Reassessment—n-Propanol; CAS
Reg. No. 71–23–8, dated August 24,
2005 and no end points of concern were
identified. In addition, toxicity data
from two structural analogues of
diisopropyl adipate, dipropyl adipate
and diisobutyl adipate, were also
considered. These substances would be
expected to have toxicological
properties similar to diisopropyl adipate
and can be used to supplement the
available toxicity data on diisopropyl
adipate. The studies summarized below
were either performed with diisopropyl
adipate, adipic acid, dipropyl adipate or
diisobutyl adipate.
In a 5 week study, guinea pigs that
were administered adipic acid orally
showed no adverse effects up to doses
of 1000 mg/kg/day. In a 90 day oral
toxicity study, male rats were given 0,
0.1, 1 or 5% adipic acid and female rats
were given 0 or 1% adipic acid. The
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:07 Jun 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
NOAEL was 1% (1000 mg/kg/day) and
a LOAEL of 5% (5000 mg/kg/day) based
on growth retardation in males. In a 19
week oral toxicity study in rats, each rat
was given 0, 50, 100, 200 or 400 mg
adipic acid/rat/day. The NOAEL was
200 mg adipic acid/rat/day (equivalent
to 1700 mg/kg/day) and the LOAEL was
400 mg adipic acid/rat/day (equivalent
to 3,400 mg/kg/day) was based on slight
effects on liver and irritation of the
intestine. In a 33 week subchronic oral
toxicity study on groups of 13–15 male
and female rats at doses of 0, 400, 800
mg/rat/day or approximately 0, 1600
and 3200 mg/kg bw/day adipic acid
produced a LOAEL of 400 mg/rat/day
(equivalent to 1600 mg/kg bw/day)
based on slight liver effects and
inflammation of the intestine and no
NOAEL was observed. In a 3 week
inhalation toxicity study, rats were
exposed to 0.126 mg/L adipic acid for 6
hr periods daily for five days a week for
a total of 15 exposures. No signs of
toxicity were seen, blood tests gave
normal values and autopsy results
revealed all organs to be normal.
The mutagenic potential of adipic
acid was evaluated in a Host-Mediated
Assay, in an in vivo cytogenetics test,
and a dominant lethal assay. These tests
were negative.
An OECD SIDS Initial Assessment
Report on Adipic Acid (2004)
concluded that adipic acid was not
carcinogenic in a limited two-year
feeding study where groups of twenty
male rats were dosed with food
containing 0, 0.1, 1, 3 and 5%
(equivalent to 0, 75, 750, 2250 or 3750
mg/kg/day) adipic acid, and female rats
were dosed with 0% (n=10) and 1%
(n=19) adipic acid, respectively. The
incidences of tumors observed in the
adipic acid treated groups were
observed at the same levels as in the
control groups.
Developmental studies (FDRL 1972)
via oral gavage using adipic acid on
mice, rats, hamsters and rabbits showed
no maternal or developmental toxicity.
The NOAELs for mice, rats and
hamsters were 263, 288 and 205 mg/kg/
day, respectively. These studies were
not conducted at the limit dose.
However, the concern for
developmental toxicity of diisopropyl
adipate is low because no systemic
toxicity was seen in chronic studies at
doses near the limit dose. In addition,
the developmental toxicity studies
conducted with two analogue
substances (dipropyl adipate and
diisobutyl adipate) via intraperitoneal
route showed no developmental toxicity
at doses around 700 mg/kg/day.
An immunotoxicity study from the
OECD SIDS 2004 IUCLID Data Set stated
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
that the lymphocyte mitogenesis test
was used to test for immunotoxicity in
vitro. In this test lymphocytes were
stimulated by a polyclonal mitogen
specific for either B or T cells. Neither
B nor T lymphocyte mitogenesis was
inhibited by adipic acid at
concentrations up to 0.3%.
There were no neurotoxicity studies
available in the database. However,
there were no clinical signs of
neurotoxicity observed in the available
studies.
There are no published metabolism
studies on diisopropyl adipate
specifically, but the metabolic pathways
of diisopropyl adipate are proposed
based on the characteristic molecular
structure of diisopropyl adipate and the
known metabolic pathways for
structurally similar compounds.
Diisopropyl adipate is a linear fatty acid
diester that has an isopropyl group
bound to the oxygen atom on each end
of the molecule. Given these structural
groups, diisopropyl adipate metabolism
is almost certainly catalyzed by
carboxylesterase enzymes that are
ubiquitous throughout the body to
produce adipic acid plus two molecules
of isopropyl alcohol.
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.
E:\FR\FM\05JNR1.SGM
05JNR1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
The rational of the toxicological
endpoints for diisopropyl adipate used
for human risk assessment is as follows.
The chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity
study in rats was selected for all
exposure scenarios and durations for
this risk assessment. The NOAEL in this
study was 750 mg/kg/day. The LOAEL
was 2,250 mg/kg/day based on body
weight retardation. The rationale for
selecting this study is as follows. The
lowest NOAEL (205 mg/kg/day) in the
database was observed in a
developmental study in hamsters. In
this study 205 mg/kg/day was the
highest dose tested. This study was not
selected because maternal and
developmental toxicity were not
observed at doses as high as 263 and
288 mg/kg/day in mice and rats,
respectively. Also, in a developmental
toxicity study where rats were treated
via intraperitoneal injection of adipic
acid esters, maternal and developmental
toxicity were not observed at doses as
high as 727 mg/kg/day. The
developmental LOAEL was 1,211 mg/
kg/day based on increased resorptions
and a slight but significant increase in
gross abnormalities. However, these
studies are not useful for endpoint
selection because they were conducted
via intraperitoneal route which is not
relevant for the dietary, dermal or
inhalation risk assessment. Also, the 19
and 33 weeks and 2 years oral toxicity
studies showed no evidence of toxicity
at doses as high as 750 mg/kg/day.
Therefore, the chronic toxicity study in
rats with the NOAEL of 750 mg/kg/day
provided a good basis for establishing
the chronic reference dose (cRfD). The
NOAEL is considered extremely
conservative because the extrapolation
from adipic acid to diisopropyl adipate
was not performed in order to keep the
toxicity endpoint selection more
conservative. Diisopropyl adipate is a
large molecular weight compound
compared to adipic acid. Converting
adipic acid to diisopropyl adipate in a
1 to 1 molar ratio (one molecule of
diisopropyl adipate contains 1 molecule
of adipic acid) would mean the NOAEL
and LOAEL values would be increased
proportionately to the molecular weight
ratios, 230 g/mol for diisopropyl adipate
and 146 g/mol for adipic acid (e.g. The
NOAEL of 750 mg/kg/day for adipic
acid would become 1,181 mg/kg/day if
converted to diisopropyl adipate). The
uncertainty factor of 100x was used for
10x intraspecies variability and 10x for
interspecies extrapolation.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to diisopropyl adipate, EPA
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:07 Jun 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
considered exposure under the
proposed exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. EPA
assessed dietary exposures from
diisopropyl adipate in food as follows:
Because no acute endpoint of concern
was identified, a quantitative acute
dietary exposure assessment is
unnecessary.
In conducting the chronic dietary
exposure assessment using the Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Model DEEM–
FCIDTM, Version 3.16, EPA used food
consumption information from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s National
Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey, What we eat in America,
(NHANES/WWEIA). This dietary survey
was conducted from 2003 to 2008. The
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
(DEEM) is a highly conservative model
with the assumption that the residue
level of the inert ingredient would be no
higher than the highest tolerance for a
given commodity. Implicit in this
assumption is that there would be
similar rates of degradation between the
active and inert ingredient (if any) and
that the concentration of inert
ingredient in the scenarios leading to
these highest of tolerances would be no
higher than the concentration of the
active ingredient. The model assumes
100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all
crops and that every food eaten by a
person each day has tolerance-level
residues. A complete description of the
general approach taken to assess inert
ingredient risks in the absence of
residue data is contained in the
memorandum entitled ‘‘Alkyl Amines
Polyalkoxylates (Cluster 4): Acute and
Chronic Aggregate (Food and Drinking
Water) Dietary Exposure and Risk
Assessments for the Inerts.’’ (D361707,
S. Piper, 2/25/09) and can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0738.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. For the purpose of the screening
level dietary risk assessment to support
this request for an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for
diisopropyl adipate, a conservative
drinking water concentration value of
100 ppb based on screening level
modeling was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water for the
chronic dietary risk assessments for
parent compound. These values were
directly entered into the dietary
exposure model.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers),
carpets, swimming pools, and hard
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
33751
surface disinfection on walls, floors,
tables).
Diisopropyl adipate may be used in
inert ingredients in pesticide products
that are registered for specific uses that
may result in outdoor residential
exposures. A screening level postapplication residential exposure and
risk assessment was performed using
high-end exposure scenarios for outdoor
residential uses based on end-use
product application methods and
highest labeled application rates
submitted for two sample product labels
containing diisopropyl adipate as inert
ingredients submitted by the registrant.
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 diisopropyl
adipate to share a common mechanism
of toxicity with any other substances,
and it does not produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that diisopropyl adipate 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.
Fetal susceptibility was not observed in
rats, mice, rabbits or hamsters in any of
the developmental studies with adipic
acid, a metabolite of diisopropyl
E:\FR\FM\05JNR1.SGM
05JNR1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
33752
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
adipate. Maternal and developmental
toxicity was not observed at doses as
high as 288 mg/kg/day. Also, in a
developmental toxicity study in rats
treated with dipropyl adipate or
diisobutyl adipate, analogues of
diisopropyl adipate, maternal and
developmental toxicity was not
observed at ≥ 1,130 mg/kg/day. A 2generation reproduction toxicity study
in rodents is not available in the
database. However, the concern for the
lack of this study is low because
maternal and offspring toxicity was not
observed at or above the limit dose (at
levels up to 1,211 mg/kg/day) in rats
and the lack of any effects on
reproductive indices in mice, rats and
rabbits. In addition, there was no
evidence of histopathological changes in
reproductive organs in chronic toxicity
studies.
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 SF. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for
diisopropyl adipate includes several
subchronic and chronic studies, several
developmental toxicity studies, a
chronic/carcinogenicity study, a
mutagenicity study, and an
immunotoxicity study. In addition, the
metabolism of structurally similar
compounds has been characterized, and
that data supports the proposed
metabolic pathways of diisopropyl
adipate. No two-generation
reproduction study is available for
diisopropyl adipate; however, the
degree of concern for the lack of this
study is low for the reasons provided in
Unit III.D.2.
ii. There is no indication that
diisopropyl adipate is a neurotoxic
chemical. Although no neurotoxicity
studies are available in the database, no
clinical signs of neurotoxicity were
observed in the available subchronic
and chronic studies. Therefore, there is
no need for a developmental
neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to
account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There was no evidence that
diisopropyl adipate results in increased
susceptibility in rats, mice or hamsters
in the prenatal developmental studies
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
EPA made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground and surface
water modeling used to assess exposure
to diisopropyl adipate in drinking
water. EPA used similarly conservative
assumptions to assess post-application
exposure of children as well as
incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:07 Jun 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by diisopropyl adipate.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
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, diisopropyl adipate
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 diisopropyl
adipate from food and water will utilize
1.9% of the cPAD for children 1–2 years
old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure.
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). Diisopropyl adipate is
currently used as an inert ingredient in
pesticide products that are 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 diisopropyl adipate.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures result in aggregate
MOEs of 14,400 for both adult males
and females and 4,400 for children.
Because EPA’s level of concern for
diisopropyl adipate 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).
Diisopropyl adipate is currently used as
an inert ingredient in pesticide products
that are registered for uses that could
result in intermediate-term residential
exposure, and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with intermediate-term
residential exposures to diisopropyl
adipate.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for intermediateterm exposures, EPA has concluded that
the combined intermediate-term food,
water, and residential exposures result
in aggregate MOEs of 16,600 for both
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
adult males and females and 4,800 for
children. Because EPA’s level of
concern for diisopropyl adipate is a
MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are
not of concern.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in a 2 year
rodent carcinogenicity study,
diisopropyl adipate is not expected to
pose a cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to diisopropyl
adipate residues.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An analytical method is not required
for enforcement purposes since the
Agency is not establishing a numerical
tolerance for residues of diisopropyl
adipate in or on any food commodities.
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 Nation 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 diisopropyl adipate.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, the proposed
use patterns may results in applications
of pesticides post-harvest. Therefore
EPA believes a more appropriate
exemption would be under 40 CFR
180.910. EPA has modified the
exemption requested to include an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of diisopropyl
adipate (CAS Reg. No. 6938–94–9)
under 40 CFR 180.910 when used as an
E:\FR\FM\05JNR1.SGM
05JNR1
33753
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
inert ingredient in pesticide
formulations applied to growing crops
or to raw agricultural commodities after
harvest.
VI. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance is established
under 40 CFR 180.910 for diisopropyl
adipate (CAS Reg. No. 6938–94–9) when
used as an inert ingredient (solvent) in
pesticide formulations applied to
growing crops or to raw agricultural
commodities after harvest.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance 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).
VIII. 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: May 29, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.910 is amended by
alphabetically adding the inert
ingredient ‘‘Diisopropyl adipate’’ to the
table to read as follows:
■
§ 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and
post-harvest; exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance.
*
*
*
*
Inert ingredients
Limits
*
*
*
Diisopropyl adipate (CAS Reg. No. 6938–94–9) ...............
*
*
*
40% in mosquito control formulations ...............................
*
*
*
*
Uses
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–13189 Filed 6–4–13; 8:45 am]
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:17 Jun 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
E:\FR\FM\05JNR1.SGM
05JNR1
*
Solvent, co-solvent.
*
33754
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
49 CFR Part 214
[Docket No. FRA–2008–0059, Notice No. 7]
RIN 2130–AC37
Railroad Workplace Safety; AdjacentTrack On-Track Safety for Roadway
Workers
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective
date.
AGENCY:
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
17:17 Jun 04, 2013
Jkt 229001
Kenneth Rusk, Staff Director, Track
Division, Office of Safety Assurance and
Compliance, FRA, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., RRS–15, Mail Stop 25,
Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202–
493–6236); or Joseph St. Peter, Trial
Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, FRA,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., RCC–12,
Mail Stop 10, Washington, DC 20590
(telephone 202–493–6052).
On
November 30, 2011, FRA published a
final rule amending its regulations on
railroad workplace safety to further
reduce the risk of serious injury or death
to roadway workers performing work
with potentially distracting equipment
near certain adjacent tracks. See 76 FR
74586. In particular, the rule requires
that roadway workers comply with
specified on-track safety procedures that
railroads must adopt to protect those
workers from the movement of trains or
other on-track equipment on ‘‘adjacent
controlled track.’’ In response to the
final rule, FRA received two petitions
for reconsideration that raised
substantive issues, requiring a detailed
response from FRA. The effective date
of the 2011 final rule was to be May 1,
2012; however, due to the complexity of
the issues raised in the petitions, as well
as in consideration of the railroads’
safety training schedules, FRA
published a final rule delaying the
effective date of the 2011 final rule until
July 1, 2013, and establishing a 60-day
comment period in order to permit
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY: This document delays the
effective date of the final rule published
November 30, 2011, and scheduled to
take effect on July 1, 2013. The final rule
mandates that roadway workers comply
with specified on-track safety
procedures that railroads must adopt to
protect those workers from the
movement of trains or other on-track
equipment on ‘‘adjacent controlled
track.’’ FRA received two petitions for
reconsideration of the final rule, and
five comments in response to the March
8, 2012, final rule that requested
comments on the petitions for
reconsideration. The petitions and
comments raised a number of
substantive issues requiring a detailed
response. As FRA’s response to those
petitions and comments is still being
reviewed, this document delays the
effective date of the final rule until July
1, 2014.
DATES: The effective date for the final
rule published November 30, 2011, at 76
VerDate Mar<15>2010
FR 74586, and delayed on March 8,
2012, at 77 FR 13978, is further delayed
until July 1, 2014.
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
interested parties an opportunity to
respond to the petitions for
reconsideration. See 77 FR 13978
(March 8, 2012). FRA received five
comments on the petitions for
reconsideration, a number of which
raise additional substantive issues or
provide further detailed information on
the issues already raised. FRA’s
response to the petitions and comments
is still being reviewed, and may not be
published before the 2011 final rule’s
current effective date of July 1, 2013.
Accordingly, in order to accommodate
railroads’ normal training schedules and
to allow railroads to incorporate any
amendments that FRA’s response to the
petitions and comments on the petitions
may make to the final rule, this
document delays the effective date of
the November 30, 2011, final rule until
July 1, 2014. Therefore, railroads and
roadway workers need not comply with
any requirements imposed by the 2011
final rule until July 1, 2014.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 214
Occupational safety and health,
Penalties, Railroad safety.
The Final Rule
In consideration of the foregoing, FRA
delays the effective date of the
November 30, 2011, final rule until July
1, 2014.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 30,
2013.
Joseph C. Szabo,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013–13291 Filed 6–4–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
E:\FR\FM\05JNR1.SGM
05JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 5, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33748-33754]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13189]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0469; FRL-9387-8]
Diisopropyl Adipate; Exemption From the Requirement of a
Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of diisopropyl adipate when used as an
inert ingredient (solvent) in pesticide formulations applied to pre-
and post-harvest crops under EPA regulations at no more than 40% in
formulated products intended for mosquito control. Wellmark
International submitted a petition prepared by Technology Sciences
Group Inc. to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), requesting establishment of an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a
maximum permissible level for residues of diisopropyl adipate.
DATES: This regulation is effective June 5, 2013. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before August 5, 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-2012-0469, 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: David Lieu, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: 703-305-0079; email address: Lieu.David@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
[[Page 33749]]
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 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. To access the OCSPP test guidelines referenced in this document
electronically, please go to https://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ``Test
Methods and Guidelines.''
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0469 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
August 5, 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-2012-0469, 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.html.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Petition for Exemption
In the Federal Register of August 22, 2012 (77 FR 50661) (FRL-9358-
9), EPA issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a,
announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 2E8031) by Wellmark
International, Central Life Sciences, 1501 East Woodfield Road, Suite
200 West, Schaumburg, IL 60173. The petition requested that 40 CFR
180.920 be amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance for residues of diisopropyl adipate (CAS Reg. No. 6938-94-
9) when used as an inert ingredient (solvent) in pesticide formulations
applied to growing crops only at no more than 40% in formulated
products intended for mosquito control. That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by Technology Sciences Group Inc., the
petitioner, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing. Based upon review of the data supporting the
petition, EPA has modified the exemption requested to include an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of
diisopropyl adipate (CAS Reg. No. 6938-94-9) under 40 CFR 180.910 when
used as an inert ingredient in pesticide formulations applied to
growing crops or to raw agricultural commodities after harvest at no
more than 40% in formulated products intended for mosquito control. The
reason for these changes is explained in Unit V.
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue. . . .''
EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the
inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures
that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA
is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be established.
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on
[[Page 33750]]
aggregate exposure for diisopropyl adipate including exposure resulting
from the exemption established by this action. EPA's assessment of
exposures and risks associated with diisopropyl adipate follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by diisopropyl adipate as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in this
unit.
The acute oral toxicity of diisopropyl adipate in rodents, as
expressed as an LD50, ranges from 1,500 mg/kg to 8,800 mg/
kg. In the guinea pig, the acute oral toxicity of diisopropyl adipate
is about 6,600 mg/kg and in the rabbit, 5,000 mg/kg. In the dog, the
acute oral LD50 of diisopropyl adipate is greater than 8,000
mg/kg. Diisopropyl adipate is minimally irritating to the eyes and skin
of rabbits.
The potential for toxicity following repeat dose exposure to
diisopropyl adipate was evaluated based on toxicity studies with
diisopropyl adipate as well as toxicity data on the two primary
metabolites of diisopropyl adipate, adipic acid (CAS Reg. No. 124-04-9)
and isopropyl alcohol (CAS Reg. No. 67-63-0). Isopropyl alcohol was
previously assessed in the U.S. EPA inert reassessment document titled,
Inert Reassessment--n-Propanol; CAS Reg. No. 71-23-8, dated August 24,
2005 and no end points of concern were identified. In addition,
toxicity data from two structural analogues of diisopropyl adipate,
dipropyl adipate and diisobutyl adipate, were also considered. These
substances would be expected to have toxicological properties similar
to diisopropyl adipate and can be used to supplement the available
toxicity data on diisopropyl adipate. The studies summarized below were
either performed with diisopropyl adipate, adipic acid, dipropyl
adipate or diisobutyl adipate.
In a 5 week study, guinea pigs that were administered adipic acid
orally showed no adverse effects up to doses of 1000 mg/kg/day. In a 90
day oral toxicity study, male rats were given 0, 0.1, 1 or 5% adipic
acid and female rats were given 0 or 1% adipic acid. The NOAEL was 1%
(1000 mg/kg/day) and a LOAEL of 5% (5000 mg/kg/day) based on growth
retardation in males. In a 19 week oral toxicity study in rats, each
rat was given 0, 50, 100, 200 or 400 mg adipic acid/rat/day. The NOAEL
was 200 mg adipic acid/rat/day (equivalent to 1700 mg/kg/day) and the
LOAEL was 400 mg adipic acid/rat/day (equivalent to 3,400 mg/kg/day)
was based on slight effects on liver and irritation of the intestine.
In a 33 week subchronic oral toxicity study on groups of 13-15 male and
female rats at doses of 0, 400, 800 mg/rat/day or approximately 0, 1600
and 3200 mg/kg bw/day adipic acid produced a LOAEL of 400 mg/rat/day
(equivalent to 1600 mg/kg bw/day) based on slight liver effects and
inflammation of the intestine and no NOAEL was observed. In a 3 week
inhalation toxicity study, rats were exposed to 0.126 mg/L adipic acid
for 6 hr periods daily for five days a week for a total of 15
exposures. No signs of toxicity were seen, blood tests gave normal
values and autopsy results revealed all organs to be normal.
The mutagenic potential of adipic acid was evaluated in a Host-
Mediated Assay, in an in vivo cytogenetics test, and a dominant lethal
assay. These tests were negative.
An OECD SIDS Initial Assessment Report on Adipic Acid (2004)
concluded that adipic acid was not carcinogenic in a limited two-year
feeding study where groups of twenty male rats were dosed with food
containing 0, 0.1, 1, 3 and 5% (equivalent to 0, 75, 750, 2250 or 3750
mg/kg/day) adipic acid, and female rats were dosed with 0% (n=10) and
1% (n=19) adipic acid, respectively. The incidences of tumors observed
in the adipic acid treated groups were observed at the same levels as
in the control groups.
Developmental studies (FDRL 1972) via oral gavage using adipic acid
on mice, rats, hamsters and rabbits showed no maternal or developmental
toxicity. The NOAELs for mice, rats and hamsters were 263, 288 and 205
mg/kg/day, respectively. These studies were not conducted at the limit
dose. However, the concern for developmental toxicity of diisopropyl
adipate is low because no systemic toxicity was seen in chronic studies
at doses near the limit dose. In addition, the developmental toxicity
studies conducted with two analogue substances (dipropyl adipate and
diisobutyl adipate) via intraperitoneal route showed no developmental
toxicity at doses around 700 mg/kg/day.
An immunotoxicity study from the OECD SIDS 2004 IUCLID Data Set
stated that the lymphocyte mitogenesis test was used to test for
immunotoxicity in vitro. In this test lymphocytes were stimulated by a
polyclonal mitogen specific for either B or T cells. Neither B nor T
lymphocyte mitogenesis was inhibited by adipic acid at concentrations
up to 0.3%.
There were no neurotoxicity studies available in the database.
However, there were no clinical signs of neurotoxicity observed in the
available studies.
There are no published metabolism studies on diisopropyl adipate
specifically, but the metabolic pathways of diisopropyl adipate are
proposed based on the characteristic molecular structure of diisopropyl
adipate and the known metabolic pathways for structurally similar
compounds. Diisopropyl adipate is a linear fatty acid diester that has
an isopropyl group bound to the oxygen atom on each end of the
molecule. Given these structural groups, diisopropyl adipate metabolism
is almost certainly catalyzed by carboxylesterase enzymes that are
ubiquitous throughout the body to produce adipic acid plus two
molecules of isopropyl alcohol.
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.
[[Page 33751]]
The rational of the toxicological endpoints for diisopropyl adipate
used for human risk assessment is as follows.
The chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study in rats was selected for
all exposure scenarios and durations for this risk assessment. The
NOAEL in this study was 750 mg/kg/day. The LOAEL was 2,250 mg/kg/day
based on body weight retardation. The rationale for selecting this
study is as follows. The lowest NOAEL (205 mg/kg/day) in the database
was observed in a developmental study in hamsters. In this study 205
mg/kg/day was the highest dose tested. This study was not selected
because maternal and developmental toxicity were not observed at doses
as high as 263 and 288 mg/kg/day in mice and rats, respectively. Also,
in a developmental toxicity study where rats were treated via
intraperitoneal injection of adipic acid esters, maternal and
developmental toxicity were not observed at doses as high as 727 mg/kg/
day. The developmental LOAEL was 1,211 mg/kg/day based on increased
resorptions and a slight but significant increase in gross
abnormalities. However, these studies are not useful for endpoint
selection because they were conducted via intraperitoneal route which
is not relevant for the dietary, dermal or inhalation risk assessment.
Also, the 19 and 33 weeks and 2 years oral toxicity studies showed no
evidence of toxicity at doses as high as 750 mg/kg/day. Therefore, the
chronic toxicity study in rats with the NOAEL of 750 mg/kg/day provided
a good basis for establishing the chronic reference dose (cRfD). The
NOAEL is considered extremely conservative because the extrapolation
from adipic acid to diisopropyl adipate was not performed in order to
keep the toxicity endpoint selection more conservative. Diisopropyl
adipate is a large molecular weight compound compared to adipic acid.
Converting adipic acid to diisopropyl adipate in a 1 to 1 molar ratio
(one molecule of diisopropyl adipate contains 1 molecule of adipic
acid) would mean the NOAEL and LOAEL values would be increased
proportionately to the molecular weight ratios, 230 g/mol for
diisopropyl adipate and 146 g/mol for adipic acid (e.g. The NOAEL of
750 mg/kg/day for adipic acid would become 1,181 mg/kg/day if converted
to diisopropyl adipate). The uncertainty factor of 100x was used for
10x intraspecies variability and 10x for interspecies extrapolation.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to diisopropyl adipate, EPA considered exposure under the
proposed exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. EPA assessed
dietary exposures from diisopropyl adipate in food as follows:
Because no acute endpoint of concern was identified, a quantitative
acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.
In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment using the
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model DEEM-FCID\TM\, Version 3.16, EPA used
food consumption information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What we eat in
America, (NHANES/WWEIA). This dietary survey was conducted from 2003 to
2008. The Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM) is a highly
conservative model with the assumption that the residue level of the
inert ingredient would be no higher than the highest tolerance for a
given commodity. Implicit in this assumption is that there would be
similar rates of degradation between the active and inert ingredient
(if any) and that the concentration of inert ingredient in the
scenarios leading to these highest of tolerances would be no higher
than the concentration of the active ingredient. The model assumes 100
percent crop treated (PCT) for all crops and that every food eaten by a
person each day has tolerance-level residues. A complete description of
the general approach taken to assess inert ingredient risks in the
absence of residue data is contained in the memorandum entitled ``Alkyl
Amines Polyalkoxylates (Cluster 4): Acute and Chronic Aggregate (Food
and Drinking Water) Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessments for the
Inerts.'' (D361707, S. Piper, 2/25/09) and can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0738.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. For the purpose of the
screening level dietary risk assessment to support this request for an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for diisopropyl adipate,
a conservative drinking water concentration value of 100 ppb based on
screening level modeling was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water for the chronic dietary risk assessments for parent
compound. These values were directly entered into the dietary exposure
model.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming
pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables).
Diisopropyl adipate may be used in inert ingredients in pesticide
products that are registered for specific uses that may result in
outdoor residential exposures. A screening level post-application
residential exposure and risk assessment was performed using high-end
exposure scenarios for outdoor residential uses based on end-use
product application methods and highest labeled application rates
submitted for two sample product labels containing diisopropyl adipate
as inert ingredients submitted by the registrant.
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 diisopropyl adipate to share a common mechanism
of toxicity with any other substances, and it does not produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that diisopropyl adipate
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. Fetal susceptibility was not
observed in rats, mice, rabbits or hamsters in any of the developmental
studies with adipic acid, a metabolite of diisopropyl
[[Page 33752]]
adipate. Maternal and developmental toxicity was not observed at doses
as high as 288 mg/kg/day. Also, in a developmental toxicity study in
rats treated with dipropyl adipate or diisobutyl adipate, analogues of
diisopropyl adipate, maternal and developmental toxicity was not
observed at >= 1,130 mg/kg/day. A 2-generation reproduction toxicity
study in rodents is not available in the database. However, the concern
for the lack of this study is low because maternal and offspring
toxicity was not observed at or above the limit dose (at levels up to
1,211 mg/kg/day) in rats and the lack of any effects on reproductive
indices in mice, rats and rabbits. In addition, there was no evidence
of histopathological changes in reproductive organs in chronic toxicity
studies.
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 SF. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for diisopropyl adipate includes several
subchronic and chronic studies, several developmental toxicity studies,
a chronic/carcinogenicity study, a mutagenicity study, and an
immunotoxicity study. In addition, the metabolism of structurally
similar compounds has been characterized, and that data supports the
proposed metabolic pathways of diisopropyl adipate. No two-generation
reproduction study is available for diisopropyl adipate; however, the
degree of concern for the lack of this study is low for the reasons
provided in Unit III.D.2.
ii. There is no indication that diisopropyl adipate is a neurotoxic
chemical. Although no neurotoxicity studies are available in the
database, no clinical signs of neurotoxicity were observed in the
available subchronic and chronic studies. Therefore, there is no need
for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to account
for neurotoxicity.
iii. There was no evidence that diisopropyl adipate results in
increased susceptibility in rats, mice or hamsters in the prenatal
developmental studies
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground
and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to diisopropyl
adipate in drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative assumptions
to assess post-application exposure of children as well as incidental
oral exposure of toddlers. These assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by diisopropyl adipate.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
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,
diisopropyl adipate 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
diisopropyl adipate from food and water will utilize 1.9% of the cPAD
for children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
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). Diisopropyl
adipate is currently used as an inert ingredient in pesticide products
that are 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 diisopropyl adipate.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 14,400 for both
adult males and females and 4,400 for children. Because EPA's level of
concern for diisopropyl adipate 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). Diisopropyl adipate is currently used as an inert ingredient in
pesticide products that are registered for uses that could result in
intermediate-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined
that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and
water with intermediate-term residential exposures to diisopropyl
adipate.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for
intermediate-term exposures, EPA has concluded that the combined
intermediate-term food, water, and residential exposures result in
aggregate MOEs of 16,600 for both adult males and females and 4,800 for
children. Because EPA's level of concern for diisopropyl adipate is a
MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in a 2 year rodent carcinogenicity study,
diisopropyl adipate is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to diisopropyl adipate residues.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is not establishing a numerical tolerance for residues of
diisopropyl adipate in or on any food commodities.
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 Nation 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 diisopropyl adipate.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, the proposed
use patterns may results in applications of pesticides post-harvest.
Therefore EPA believes a more appropriate exemption would be under 40
CFR 180.910. EPA has modified the exemption requested to include an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of
diisopropyl adipate (CAS Reg. No. 6938-94-9) under 40 CFR 180.910 when
used as an
[[Page 33753]]
inert ingredient in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops or
to raw agricultural commodities after harvest.
VI. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established under 40 CFR 180.910 for diisopropyl adipate (CAS Reg. No.
6938-94-9) when used as an inert ingredient (solvent) in pesticide
formulations applied to growing crops or to raw agricultural
commodities after harvest.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance 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).
VIII. 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: May 29, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. Section 180.910 is amended by alphabetically adding the inert
ingredient ``Diisopropyl adipate'' to the table to read as follows:
Sec. 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance.
* * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inert ingredients Limits Uses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Diisopropyl adipate (CAS Reg. No. 6938- 40% in mosquito control Solvent, co-solvent.
94-9). formulations.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2013-13189 Filed 6-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P