Novaluron; Pesticide Tolerances, 40027-40033 [2013-15869]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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: June 21, 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. In § 180.480 revise paragraph (a)
introductory text and revise the entry
‘‘Pepper’’ in the table in paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
■
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 180.480 Fenbuconazole; tolerances for
residues.
(a) Tolerances are established for
residues of the fungicide fenbuconazole,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities in
the table below. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified below is to be
determined by measuring only the sum
of fenbuconazole, alpha-[2-(4chlorophenyl)-ethyl]-alpha-phenyl-3(1H-1,2,4-triazole)-1-propanenitrile, and
its metabolites RH-9129, cis-5-(4chlorophenyl)-dihydro-3-phenyl-3-(1H1,2,4-triazole-1-ylmethyl)-2-3 Hfuranone, and RH-9130, trans-5-(4chlorophenyl)-dihydro-3-phenyl-3-(1H1,2,4-triazole-1-ylmethyl)-2-3 Hfuranone, calculated as the
stoichiometric equivalent of
fenbuconazole, in or on the following
agricultural commodities.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Jul 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
Pepper ..................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–15867 Filed 7–2–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0291; FRL–9389–7]
Novaluron; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of novaluron in
or on peanut and soybean, seed.
Makhteshim-Agan of North America
requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA). This regulation additionally
deletes the time-limited tolerance for
strawberry, as that tolerance expired on
December 31, 2011.
DATES: This regulation is effective July
3, 2013. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
September 3, 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–2012–0291, 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:
Jennifer Gaines, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–5967; email address:
gaines.jennifer@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
*
*
40027
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–2012–0291 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 September 3, 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
E:\FR\FM\03JYR1.SGM
03JYR1
40028
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2012–0291, 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.
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 2F7999) by MakhteshimAgan of North America, 3120
Highwoods Blvd., Suite 100, Raleigh,
NC 27604. The petition requested that
40 CFR 180.598 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of
the insecticide novaluron, N-[[[3-chloro4-[1,1,2-trifluoro-2-(trifluoromethoxy)
ethoxy]phenyl]amino]carbonyl]-2,6difluorobenzamide, in or on peanuts at
0.01 parts per million (ppm) and
soybean, seed at 0.06 ppm. That
document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Makhteshim-Agan
of North America, 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 has revised
the tolerance level for soybean, seed.
The reason for this change is 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Jul 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 novaluron
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with novaluron 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.
Novaluron has low acute toxicity via
the oral, dermal, and inhalation routes
of exposure. It is not an eye or skin
irritant and is not a dermal sensitizer. In
subchronic and chronic toxicity studies,
novaluron primarily produced
hematotoxic effects such as
methemoglobinemia, decreased
hemoglobin, decreased hematocrit, and
decreased red blood cells (RBCs) (or
erythrocytes) associated with increased
erythropoiesis. Increased spleen weights
and/or hemosiderosis in the spleen were
considered to be due to enhanced
removal of damaged erythrocytes and
not to a direct immunotoxic effect.
There was no maternal or
developmental toxicity seen in the rat
and rabbit developmental toxicity
studies up to the limit doses. In the 2generation reproductive toxicity study
in rats, both parental and offspring
toxicity (increased spleen weights) were
observed at the same dose. Reproductive
toxicity (decreases in epididymal sperm
counts and increased age at preputial
separation in the F1 generation) was
observed at a higher dose than the
increased spleen weights and were
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
consistent with the primary effects in
the database.
Signs of neurotoxicity (piloerection,
irregular breathing), changes in
functional observational batter
parameters (increased head swaying,
abnormal gait), and neuropathology
(sciatic and tibial nerve degeneration)
were seen in the rat acute neurotoxicity
study at the limit dose. However, no
signs of neurotoxicity or neuropathology
were observed in the subchronic
neurotoxicity study in rats at similar
doses or in any other subchronic or
chronic toxicity study in rats, mice, or
dogs. Therefore, there is no concern for
neurotoxicity resulting from exposure to
novaluron.
There was no evidence of
carcinogenic potential in either the rat
or mouse carcinogenicity studies. There
was no concern for genotoxicity or
mutagenicity. Therefore novaluron was
classified as ‘‘not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans.’’
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by novaluron as well as
the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document
Novaluron: Human-Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Section 3 Uses
on Peanut and Soybean at pp. 37–40 in
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–
0291.
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 the NOAEL and the
LOAEL are indentified. 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
E:\FR\FM\03JYR1.SGM
03JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 novaluron used for human
40029
risk assessment is shown in Table 1. of
this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR NOVALURON FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Point of departure
and uncertainty/
safety factors
Exposure/scenario
Acute dietary (General population including infants and children).
Chronic dietary (All populations) ............
Incidental oral short-term .......................
(1 to 30 days) and Intermediate-Term (1
to 6 months).
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days) ...........
Dermal intermediate-term
months).
(1
to
6
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 days) and
Intermediate Term (1 to 6 months).
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
None .....................
None .....................
NOAEL = 1.1 mg/
kg/day.
UFA = 10X
UFH = 10X
FQPA SF = 1X
NOAEL = 4.38 mg/
kg/day.
UFA = 10X
UFH = 10X
FQPA SF = 1X
Not applicable and
none.
Chronic RfD =
0.011 mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.011 mg/
kg/day
An endpoint of concern attributable to a single dose was
not identified. An acute RfD was not established.
Combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity feeding in rat.
LOAEL = 30.6 mg/kg/day based on erythrocyte damage
resulting in a compensatory regenerative anemia.
Dermal (or oral)
study NOAEL =
4.38 mg/kg/day
(dermal absorption rate = 10%
when appropriate).
UFA = 10X
UFH = 10X
FQPA SF = 1X
Inhalation (or oral)
study NOAEL =
4.38 mg/kg/day
(inhalation absorption rate =
100%).
UFA = 10X
UFH = 10X
FQPA SF = 1X
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) ...........
LOC for MOE =
100.
None .....................
LOC for MOE =
100.
LOC for MOE =
100.
90-day feeding study in rat.
LOAEL = 8.64 mg/kg/day based on clinical chemistry (decreased hemoglobin, hematocrit, and RBC counts) and
histopathology (increased hematopoiesis and hemosiderosis in spleen and liver).
No toxicity was observed at the limit dose in the dermal
study and there were no developmental toxicity concerns at the limit-dose; therefore, quantification of shortterm dermal risk is not necessary.
90-day feeding study in rat.
LOAEL = 8.64 mg/kg/day based on clinical chemistry (decreased hemoglobin, hematocrit, and RBC counts) and
histopathology (increased hematopoiesis and hemosiderosis in spleen and liver).
90-day feeding study in rat.
LOAEL = 8.64 mg/kg/day based on clinical chemistry (decreased hemoglobin, hematocrit, and RBC counts) and
histopathology (increased hematopoiesis and hemosiderosis in spleen and liver).
Classification: Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD 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 novaluron, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing
novaluron tolerances in 40 CFR 180.598.
EPA assessed dietary exposures from
novaluron 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 novaluron; therefore, a quantitative
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Jul 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
acute dietary exposure assessment is
unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA under the National
Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey, What We Eat in America
(NHANES/WWEIA); 2003–2008. As to
residue levels in food, EPA incorporated
average percent crop treated (PCT) data
for apples, cabbage, cauliflower, cotton,
pears, potatoes, strawberries, and
tomatoes and utilized estimates for PCT
for recently registered uses for grain
sorghum and sweet corn. 100 PCT was
assumed for the remaining food
commodities. Anticipated residues
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(ARs) for meat, milk, hog, and poultry
commodities were calculated based on
the proposed/registered uses, and
incorporated average field trial residues,
percent crop treated for new uses
(PCTn) data for grain sorghum and
sweet corn, average PCT data for apple
and cotton, and an assumption of 100
PCT for sugarcane, aspirated grain
fractions (AGF), and cowpea seed.
The chronic analysis also
incorporated average field trial residues,
tolerance-level residues for the
proposed commodities, average
greenhouse trial residue for tomatoes,
and half-limit of quantitation (LOQ)
residues for food commodities other
than those covered by a higher tolerance
E:\FR\FM\03JYR1.SGM
03JYR1
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
40030
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
as a result of use on growing crops from
the registered use in food and feed
handling establishments. Additionally,
empirical processing factors for apple
juice (translated to pear and stone fruit
juice), cottonseed oil, dried plums, and
´
tomato paste and puree, and Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM)
(ver. 7.81) default processing factors for
the remaining processed commodities,
where provided were incorporated.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that novaluron does not pose
a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a
dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) 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.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states
that the Agency may use data on the
actual percent of food treated for
assessing chronic dietary risk only if:
• Condition A: The data used are
reliable and provide a valid basis to
show what percentage of the food
derived from such crop is likely to
contain the pesticide residue.
• Condition B: The exposure estimate
does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group.
• Condition C: Data are available on
pesticide use and food consumption in
a particular area, the exposure estimate
does not understate exposure for the
population in such area.
In addition, the Agency must provide
for periodic evaluation of any estimates
used. To provide for the periodic
evaluation of the estimate of PCT as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F),
EPA may require registrants to submit
data on PCT.
The Agency estimated the PCT for
existing uses as follows: Apples at 10%;
cabbage at 10%; cauliflower at < 2.5%,
cotton at < 2.5%, pears at 15%, potatoes
at < 2.5%, strawberries at 35%, and
tomatoes at < 1%.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Jul 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
In most cases, EPA uses available data
from United States Department of
Agriculture/National Agricultural
Statistics Service (USDA/NASS),
proprietary market surveys, and the
National Pesticide Use Database for the
chemical/crop combination for the most
recent 6–7 years. EPA uses an average
PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis.
The average PCT figure for each existing
use is derived by combining available
public and private market survey data
for that use, averaging across all
observations, and rounding to the
nearest 5%, except for those situations
in which the average PCT is less than
one. In those cases, 1% is used as the
average PCT and 2.5% is used as the
maximum PCT. EPA uses a maximum
PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the highest
observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available
public and private market survey data
for the existing use and rounded up to
the nearest multiple of 5%.
The Agency estimated the PCT for
recently approved uses as follows:
Sweet corn at 36% and grain sorghum
at 2%.
EPA estimates PCTn for novaluron
based on the PCT of the dominant
pesticide (i.e., the one with the greatest
PCT) on that site over the three most
recent years of available data.
Comparisons are only made among
pesticides of the same pesticide types
(i.e., the dominant insecticide on the
use site is selected for comparison with
a new insecticide). The PCTs included
in the analysis may be for the same
pesticide or for different pesticides
since the same or different pesticides
may dominate for each year. Typically,
EPA uses USDA/NASS as the source for
raw PCT data because it is publicly
available and doesn not have to be
calculated from available data sources.
When a specific use site is not surveyed
by USDA/NASS, EPA uses proprietary
data and calculates the estimated PCT.
The estimated PCT for new uses,
based on the average PCT of the market
leader, is appropriate for use in the
chronic dietary risk assessment. This
method of estimating a PCT for a new
use of a registered pesticide or a new
pesticide produces a high-end estimate
that is unlikely, in most cases, to be
exceeded during the initial five years of
actual use. The predominant factors that
bear on whether the estimated PCT for
new uses could be exceeded are:
1. The extent of pest pressure on the
crops in question;
2. The pest spectrum of the new
pesticide in comparison with the market
leaders as well as whether the market
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
leaders are well-established for this use;
and
3. Resistance concerns with the
market leaders. Novaluron specifically
targets lepidopterous insects, which are
not key pests of sorghum but are key
pests of sweet corn. However, novaluron
has a relatively narrow spectrum of pest
activity when compared to the market
leader insecticides.
All information currently available
has been considered for novaluron use
on sorghum and sweet corn, and it is the
opinion of the Agency that it is unlikely
that actual PCT for novaluron will
exceed the estimated PCT for new uses
during the next 5 years.
The Agency believes that the three
conditions discussed in Unit III.C.1.iv.
have been met. With respect to
Condition A, PCT estimates are derived
from Federal and private market survey
data, which are reliable and have a valid
basis. The Agency is reasonably certain
that the percentage of the food treated
is not likely to be an underestimation.
As to Conditions b and c, regional
consumption information and
consumption information for significant
subpopulations is taken into account
through EPA’s computer-based model
for evaluating the exposure of
significant subpopulations including
several regional groups. Use of this
consumption information in EPA’s risk
assessment process ensures that EPA’s
exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant
subpopulation group and allows the
Agency to be reasonably certain that no
regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those
estimated by the Agency. Other than the
data available through national food
consumption surveys, EPA does not
have available reliable information on
the regional consumption of food to
which novaluron may be applied in a
particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The residues of concern in
drinking water are novaluron and it
chlorophenyl urea and chloroaniline
degradates. The Agency used screeninglevel water exposure models in the
dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for novaluron and its
degradates in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of novaluron.
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.
EPA utilized the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) for estimating
E:\FR\FM\03JYR1.SGM
03JYR1
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
parent novaluron in surface water, the
Tier 1 FQPA Index Reservoir Screening
Tool (FIRST) model for surface water
estimates for chlorophenyl urea and
chloroaniline degradates, and the
Screening Concentration in Ground
Water (SCI–GROW) model for
novaluron, chorophenyl urea, and
chloroaniline in ground water. Based on
these models, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of
novaluron, chlorophenyl urea, and
chloroaniline for chronic exposures for
non-cancer assessments are estimated to
be 0.41 parts per billion (ppb), 0.375
ppb, and 3.301 ppb respectively, for
surface water and 0.00137 ppb, 0.00149
ppb, and 0.00658 ppb respectively for
ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. The
highest 1-in-10 year annual mean
surface water EDWCs were combined to
estimate drinking water exposures. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration of value 4.086 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). Novaluron
is currently registered for the following
uses that could result in residential
exposures: Indoor and outdoor uses for
the control of crickets (cracks and
crevice and spot treatments) in
residential areas such as homes and
apartment buildings, and their
immediate surroundings, and on modes
of transportation. There is a potential for
exposure in residential settings during
the application process for homeowners
who use products containing novaluron.
Additionally, exposure routes were
assessed for post-application exposures
for adults and children via inhalation
routes and post-application incidental
oral (hand-to-mouth) exposure for
children (1 to < 2 years old).
Additionally, a combined residential
assessment that consisted of children (1
to < 2 years old) inhalation and oral
(hand-to-mouth) post-application
exposure was included. Details of the
residential risk exposure and risk
assessment are contained in the EPA
public docket EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–
0466 at https://www.regulations.gov in
document ‘‘Novaluron: Human-Health
Risk Assessment for Proposed Section 3
Uses on Sweet Corn and in Food-or
Feed-Handling Establishments’’ on pp.
21–26.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Jul 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found novaluron to share
a common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and novaluron
does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that novaluron 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.
The prenatal and postnatal toxicology
database for novaluron includes rat and
rabbit prenatal developmental toxicity
studies and a 2-generation reproduction
toxicity study in rats. There was no
evidence of increased quantitative or
qualitative susceptibility following in
utero exposure to rats or rabbits in the
developmental toxicity studies and no
evidence of increased quantitative or
qualitative susceptibility of offspring in
the reproduction study. Neither
maternal nor developmental toxicity
was seen in the developmental studies
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40031
up to the limit doses. In the 2-generation
reproductive study in rats, offspring and
parental toxicity (increased absolute and
relative spleen weights) were similar
and occurred at the same dose;
additionally, reproductive effects
(decreases in epididymal sperm counts
and increased age at preputial
separation in the F1 generation)
occurred at a higher dose than that
which resulted in parental toxicity.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for novaluron
is complete.
ii. There is minimal indication that
novaluron 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
novaluron 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 chronic dietary food exposure
assessment was performed using
anticipated residues derived from
reliable residue field trials, tolerancelevel residues for proposed
commodities, average PCT data for some
commodities, and PCTn data for grain
sorghum and sweet corn. For the
remaining food commodities, 100 PCT
was assumed. The registered food
handling use was also incorporated into
the dietary assessment. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to novaluron in
drinking water. EPA used similarly
conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure of children as well
as incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by novaluron.
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
E:\FR\FM\03JYR1.SGM
03JYR1
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
40032
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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, novaluron 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 novaluron from
food and water will utilize 55% of the
cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure. The residential exposure
assessment was conducted using highend estimates of use and potential
exposure providing a conservative,
health protective estimate of risk.
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). Novaluron 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
novaluron.
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 2,520 for adults and 480 for
children 1–2 years old. Because EPA’s
level of concern for novaluron 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 aggregate exposure
(food+drinking water+residential)
assessment was not conducted since
residential intermediate-term exposures
are not likely due to the intermittent
nature of applications by homeowners.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
novaluron 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Jul 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
from aggregate exposure to novaluron
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(gas chromatography/electron-capture
detection (GC/ECD) method and a highperformance liquid chromatography/
ultraviolet (HPLC/UV) method) are
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 established an MRL for
residues of novaluron in or on immature
soybean seed at 0.01 ppm. Immature
soybean seed (edamame) is not covered
by soybean, seed; therefore,
harmonization is not an issue for the
proposed soybean use. There is no
Codex MRL for peanut.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
Based on analysis from the residue
field trial data supporting the petition
and use of the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and
Development tolerance calculation
procedures, EPA revised the proposed
tolerance on soybean, seed from 0.06
ppm to 0.07 ppm. Additionally, the
commodity term for peanuts is being
revised.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of novaluron, N-[[[3-chloro4-[1,1,2-trifluoro-2-(trifluoromethoxy)
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ethoxy]phenyl]amino]carbonyl]-2,6difluorobenzamide, in or on peanut and
soybean, seed at 0.01 and 0.07 ppm,
respectively.
This regulation additionally deletes
the time-limited tolerance for
strawberry, as that tolerance expired on
December 31, 2011.
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
E:\FR\FM\03JYR1.SGM
03JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘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: June 25, 2013.
G. Jeffrey Herndon,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.598:
a. Add alphabetically the
commodities to the table in paragraph
(a).
■ b. Remove and reserve paragraph (b).
■
■
§ 180.598 Novaluron; tolerances for
residues.
WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
(a) General. * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
Peanut ..................................
*
*
0.01
*
*
*
Soybean, seed ......................
*
*
0.07
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Jul 02, 2013
Jkt 229001
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–15869 Filed 7–2–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
42 CFR Part 121
RIN 0906–AA73
Organ Procurement and
Transplantation Network
Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA), Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
HHS is issuing this final rule
(herein referred to as ‘‘this rule’’) to add
vascularized composite allografts
(VCAs) as specified herein to the
definition of organs covered by the rules
governing the operation of the Organ
Procurement and Transplantation
Network (OPTN) (herein referred to as
the OPTN final rule). When it enacted
the National Organ Transplant Act in
1984, Congress included a definition of
the term organ and authorized the
Secretary to expand this definition by
regulation. The Secretary has previously
exercised this authority and expanded
the statutory definition of organ. Prior to
this rule, the OPTN final rule defined
covered organs as ‘‘a human kidney,
liver, heart, lung, or pancreas, or
intestine (including the esophagus,
stomach, small and/or large intestine, or
any portion of the gastrointestinal tract).
Blood vessels recovered from an organ
donor during the recovery of such
organ(s) are considered part of an organ
with which they are procured for
purposes of this part if the vessels are
intended for use in organ
transplantation and labeled ‘For use in
organ transplantation only.’ ’’ This rule
also includes a corresponding change to
the definition of human organs covered
by section 301 of the National Organ
Transplant Act of 1984, as amended
(NOTA).
SUMMARY:
DATES:
The final rule is effective July 3,
2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James Bowman, M.D., Medical Director,
Division of Transplantation, Healthcare
Systems Bureau (HSB), Health
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40033
Resources and Services Administration
(HRSA), 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 12C–
06, Rockville, Maryland 20857, or by
telephone (301) 443–7577.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
December 16, 2011, HHS published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
in the Federal Register (76 FR 78216) to
include VCAs within the definition of
organs covered by the OPTN final rule
and to make a corresponding change to
the definition of human organs covered
by section 301 of NOTA. The NPRM
provided for a 60-day comment period
and HHS received 29 comment letters
raising a variety of issues. HHS has
carefully considered all comments in
developing this rule, as outlined in
Section III below, presenting a summary
of all major comments and
Departmental responses.
I. Background
As discussed in the NPRM, the
transplant community has referred to
the transplants of intact vascularized
body parts such as hands and faces as
composite tissue allograft transplants.
As tissues, these components have been
under the regulatory jurisdiction of the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
For the reasons outlined in the NPRM,
the Secretary believes that these
components, based on their clinical
characteristics, are more characteristic
of organs as defined specifically in
NOTA and subsequently by regulation
in the case of intestines and blood
vessels used in conjunction with organ
transplantation. For the purpose of this
regulation, these components are
described as vascularized composite
allografts (VCAs).
Human cells or tissue intended for
implantation, transplantation, infusion,
or transfer into a human recipient are
regulated as human cells, tissues, and
cellular and tissue-based products (or
HCT/Ps). FDA regulates HCT/Ps under
section 361 of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 264) and 21 CFR parts
1270 and 1271. Examples of such
tissues are bone, skin, corneas,
ligaments, tendons, dura mater, heart
valves, hematopoietic stem/progenitor
cells derived from peripheral and cord
blood, oocytes, and semen. FDA does
not regulate the transplantation of
vascularized human organ transplants
such as kidney, liver, heart, lung, or
pancreas. FDA regulations provide that
‘‘vascularized human organs for
transplantation’’ are not considered
HCT/Ps. 21 CFR 1271.3(d)(1). HRSA
oversees the transplantation of
vascularized human organs.
At present, face and hand allografts,
and other body parts meeting the
proposed definition of VCAs, are not
E:\FR\FM\03JYR1.SGM
03JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 128 (Wednesday, July 3, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40027-40033]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15869]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0291; FRL-9389-7]
Novaluron; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
novaluron in or on peanut and soybean, seed. Makhteshim-Agan of North
America requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). This regulation additionally deletes the time-
limited tolerance for strawberry, as that tolerance expired on December
31, 2011.
DATES: This regulation is effective July 3, 2013. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before September 3, 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-2012-0291, 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: Jennifer Gaines, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-5967; email address: gaines.jennifer@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-2012-0291 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
September 3, 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
[[Page 40028]]
by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0291, 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
2F7999) by Makhteshim-Agan of North America, 3120 Highwoods Blvd.,
Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27604. The petition requested that 40 CFR
180.598 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the
insecticide novaluron, N-[[[3-chloro-4-[1,1,2-trifluoro-2-
(trifluoromethoxy)ethoxy]phenyl]amino]carbonyl]-2,6-difluorobenzamide,
in or on peanuts at 0.01 parts per million (ppm) and soybean, seed at
0.06 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared
by Makhteshim-Agan of North America, 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 has
revised the tolerance level for soybean, seed. The reason for this
change is 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 novaluron including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with novaluron 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.
Novaluron has low acute toxicity via the oral, dermal, and
inhalation routes of exposure. It is not an eye or skin irritant and is
not a dermal sensitizer. In subchronic and chronic toxicity studies,
novaluron primarily produced hematotoxic effects such as
methemoglobinemia, decreased hemoglobin, decreased hematocrit, and
decreased red blood cells (RBCs) (or erythrocytes) associated with
increased erythropoiesis. Increased spleen weights and/or hemosiderosis
in the spleen were considered to be due to enhanced removal of damaged
erythrocytes and not to a direct immunotoxic effect.
There was no maternal or developmental toxicity seen in the rat and
rabbit developmental toxicity studies up to the limit doses. In the 2-
generation reproductive toxicity study in rats, both parental and
offspring toxicity (increased spleen weights) were observed at the same
dose. Reproductive toxicity (decreases in epididymal sperm counts and
increased age at preputial separation in the F1 generation) was
observed at a higher dose than the increased spleen weights and were
consistent with the primary effects in the database.
Signs of neurotoxicity (piloerection, irregular breathing), changes
in functional observational batter parameters (increased head swaying,
abnormal gait), and neuropathology (sciatic and tibial nerve
degeneration) were seen in the rat acute neurotoxicity study at the
limit dose. However, no signs of neurotoxicity or neuropathology were
observed in the subchronic neurotoxicity study in rats at similar doses
or in any other subchronic or chronic toxicity study in rats, mice, or
dogs. Therefore, there is no concern for neurotoxicity resulting from
exposure to novaluron.
There was no evidence of carcinogenic potential in either the rat
or mouse carcinogenicity studies. There was no concern for genotoxicity
or mutagenicity. Therefore novaluron was classified as ``not likely to
be carcinogenic to humans.''
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by novaluron as well as the no-observed-adverse-
effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level
(LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document Novaluron: Human-Health Risk Assessment
for Proposed Section 3 Uses on Peanut and Soybean at pp. 37-40 in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0291.
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 the NOAEL and the LOAEL are indentified.
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
[[Page 40029]]
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 novaluron used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1. of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Novaluron for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure
Exposure/scenario and uncertainty/ RfD, PAD, LOC for Study and toxicological effects
safety factors risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (General population None................ None............... An endpoint of concern
including infants and children). attributable to a single dose was
not identified. An acute RfD was
not established.
Chronic dietary (All populations) NOAEL = 1.1 mg/kg/ Chronic RfD = 0.011 Combined chronic toxicity/
day. mg/kg/day. carcinogenicity feeding in rat.
UFA = 10X........... cPAD = 0.011 mg/kg/ LOAEL = 30.6 mg/kg/day based on
UFH = 10X........... day. erythrocyte damage resulting in a
FQPA SF = 1X........ compensatory regenerative anemia.
Incidental oral short-term....... NOAEL = 4.38 mg/kg/ LOC for MOE = 100.. 90-day feeding study in rat.
(1 to 30 days) and Intermediate- day. LOAEL = 8.64 mg/kg/day based on
Term (1 to 6 months). UFA = 10X........... clinical chemistry (decreased
UFH = 10X........... hemoglobin, hematocrit, and RBC
FQPA SF = 1X........ counts) and histopathology
(increased hematopoiesis and
hemosiderosis in spleen and
liver).
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days). Not applicable and None............... No toxicity was observed at the
none. limit dose in the dermal study
and there were no developmental
toxicity concerns at the limit-
dose; therefore, quantification
of short-term dermal risk is not
necessary.
Dermal intermediate-term (1 to 6 Dermal (or oral) LOC for MOE = 100.. 90-day feeding study in rat.
months). study NOAEL = 4.38 LOAEL = 8.64 mg/kg/day based on
mg/kg/day (dermal clinical chemistry (decreased
absorption rate = hemoglobin, hematocrit, and RBC
10% when counts) and histopathology
appropriate). (increased hematopoiesis and
UFA = 10X........... hemosiderosis in spleen and
UFH = 10X........... liver).
FQPA SF = 1X........
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 Inhalation (or oral) LOC for MOE = 100.. 90-day feeding study in rat.
days) and Intermediate Term (1 study NOAEL = 4.38 LOAEL = 8.64 mg/kg/day based on
to 6 months). mg/kg/day clinical chemistry (decreased
(inhalation hemoglobin, hematocrit, and RBC
absorption rate = counts) and histopathology
100%). (increased hematopoiesis and
UFA = 10X........... hemosiderosis in spleen and
UFH = 10X........... liver).
FQPA SF = 1X........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 novaluron, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing novaluron tolerances in 40 CFR
180.598. EPA assessed dietary exposures from novaluron 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 novaluron; 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 USDA under the
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America (NHANES/WWEIA); 2003-2008. As to residue levels in food, EPA
incorporated average percent crop treated (PCT) data for apples,
cabbage, cauliflower, cotton, pears, potatoes, strawberries, and
tomatoes and utilized estimates for PCT for recently registered uses
for grain sorghum and sweet corn. 100 PCT was assumed for the remaining
food commodities. Anticipated residues (ARs) for meat, milk, hog, and
poultry commodities were calculated based on the proposed/registered
uses, and incorporated average field trial residues, percent crop
treated for new uses (PCTn) data for grain sorghum and sweet corn,
average PCT data for apple and cotton, and an assumption of 100 PCT for
sugarcane, aspirated grain fractions (AGF), and cowpea seed.
The chronic analysis also incorporated average field trial
residues, tolerance-level residues for the proposed commodities,
average greenhouse trial residue for tomatoes, and half-limit of
quantitation (LOQ) residues for food commodities other than those
covered by a higher tolerance
[[Page 40030]]
as a result of use on growing crops from the registered use in food and
feed handling establishments. Additionally, empirical processing
factors for apple juice (translated to pear and stone fruit juice),
cottonseed oil, dried plums, and tomato paste and pur[eacute]e, and
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM) (ver. 7.81) default processing
factors for the remaining processed commodities, where provided were
incorporated.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that novaluron does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) 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.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary
risk only if:
Condition A: The data used are reliable and provide a
valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop
is likely to contain the pesticide residue.
Condition B: The exposure estimate does not underestimate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
Condition C: Data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area.
In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any
estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate
of PCT as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require
registrants to submit data on PCT.
The Agency estimated the PCT for existing uses as follows: Apples
at 10%; cabbage at 10%; cauliflower at < 2.5%, cotton at < 2.5%, pears
at 15%, potatoes at < 2.5%, strawberries at 35%, and tomatoes at < 1%.
In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States
Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service
(USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and the National Pesticide Use
Database for the chemical/crop combination for the most recent 6-7
years. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis. The
average PCT figure for each existing use is derived by combining
available public and private market survey data for that use, averaging
across all observations, and rounding to the nearest 5%, except for
those situations in which the average PCT is less than one. In those
cases, 1% is used as the average PCT and 2.5% is used as the maximum
PCT. EPA uses a maximum PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the highest observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available public and private market survey
data for the existing use and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%.
The Agency estimated the PCT for recently approved uses as follows:
Sweet corn at 36% and grain sorghum at 2%.
EPA estimates PCTn for novaluron based on the PCT of the dominant
pesticide (i.e., the one with the greatest PCT) on that site over the
three most recent years of available data. Comparisons are only made
among pesticides of the same pesticide types (i.e., the dominant
insecticide on the use site is selected for comparison with a new
insecticide). The PCTs included in the analysis may be for the same
pesticide or for different pesticides since the same or different
pesticides may dominate for each year. Typically, EPA uses USDA/NASS as
the source for raw PCT data because it is publicly available and doesn
not have to be calculated from available data sources. When a specific
use site is not surveyed by USDA/NASS, EPA uses proprietary data and
calculates the estimated PCT.
The estimated PCT for new uses, based on the average PCT of the
market leader, is appropriate for use in the chronic dietary risk
assessment. This method of estimating a PCT for a new use of a
registered pesticide or a new pesticide produces a high-end estimate
that is unlikely, in most cases, to be exceeded during the initial five
years of actual use. The predominant factors that bear on whether the
estimated PCT for new uses could be exceeded are:
1. The extent of pest pressure on the crops in question;
2. The pest spectrum of the new pesticide in comparison with the
market leaders as well as whether the market leaders are well-
established for this use; and
3. Resistance concerns with the market leaders. Novaluron
specifically targets lepidopterous insects, which are not key pests of
sorghum but are key pests of sweet corn. However, novaluron has a
relatively narrow spectrum of pest activity when compared to the market
leader insecticides.
All information currently available has been considered for
novaluron use on sorghum and sweet corn, and it is the opinion of the
Agency that it is unlikely that actual PCT for novaluron will exceed
the estimated PCT for new uses during the next 5 years.
The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed in Unit
III.C.1.iv. have been met. With respect to Condition A, PCT estimates
are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are
reliable and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that
the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an
underestimation. As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption
information and consumption information for significant subpopulations
is taken into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating
the exposure of significant subpopulations including several regional
groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment
process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency
to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than
the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does
not have available reliable information on the regional consumption of
food to which novaluron may be applied in a particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The residues of concern in
drinking water are novaluron and it chlorophenyl urea and chloroaniline
degradates. The Agency used screening-level water exposure models in
the dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for novaluron and its
degradates in drinking water. These simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of
novaluron. 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.
EPA utilized the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis
Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS) for estimating
[[Page 40031]]
parent novaluron in surface water, the Tier 1 FQPA Index Reservoir
Screening Tool (FIRST) model for surface water estimates for
chlorophenyl urea and chloroaniline degradates, and the Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) model for novaluron,
chorophenyl urea, and chloroaniline in ground water. Based on these
models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
novaluron, chlorophenyl urea, and chloroaniline for chronic exposures
for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 0.41 parts per billion
(ppb), 0.375 ppb, and 3.301 ppb respectively, for surface water and
0.00137 ppb, 0.00149 ppb, and 0.00658 ppb respectively for ground
water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. The highest 1-in-10 year
annual mean surface water EDWCs were combined to estimate drinking
water exposures. For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration of value 4.086 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). Novaluron is
currently registered for the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Indoor and outdoor uses for the control of
crickets (cracks and crevice and spot treatments) in residential areas
such as homes and apartment buildings, and their immediate
surroundings, and on modes of transportation. There is a potential for
exposure in residential settings during the application process for
homeowners who use products containing novaluron.
Additionally, exposure routes were assessed for post-application
exposures for adults and children via inhalation routes and post-
application incidental oral (hand-to-mouth) exposure for children (1 to
< 2 years old). Additionally, a combined residential assessment that
consisted of children (1 to < 2 years old) inhalation and oral (hand-
to-mouth) post-application exposure was included. Details of the
residential risk exposure and risk assessment are contained in the EPA
public docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0466 at https://www.regulations.gov in
document ``Novaluron: Human-Health Risk Assessment for Proposed Section
3 Uses on Sweet Corn and in Food-or Feed-Handling Establishments'' on
pp. 21-26.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found novaluron to share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and novaluron does not appear to produce a
toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that novaluron 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. The prenatal and postnatal
toxicology database for novaluron includes rat and rabbit prenatal
developmental toxicity studies and a 2-generation reproduction toxicity
study in rats. There was no evidence of increased quantitative or
qualitative susceptibility following in utero exposure to rats or
rabbits in the developmental toxicity studies and no evidence of
increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility of offspring in
the reproduction study. Neither maternal nor developmental toxicity was
seen in the developmental studies up to the limit doses. In the 2-
generation reproductive study in rats, offspring and parental toxicity
(increased absolute and relative spleen weights) were similar and
occurred at the same dose; additionally, reproductive effects
(decreases in epididymal sperm counts and increased age at preputial
separation in the F1 generation) occurred at a higher dose than that
which resulted in parental toxicity.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for novaluron is complete.
ii. There is minimal indication that novaluron 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 novaluron 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 chronic dietary food exposure assessment was performed
using anticipated residues derived from reliable residue field trials,
tolerance-level residues for proposed commodities, average PCT data for
some commodities, and PCTn data for grain sorghum and sweet corn. For
the remaining food commodities, 100 PCT was assumed. The registered
food handling use was also incorporated into the dietary assessment.
EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and
surface water modeling used to assess exposure to novaluron 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 novaluron.
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
[[Page 40032]]
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,
novaluron 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
novaluron from food and water will utilize 55% of the cPAD for children
1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
The residential exposure assessment was conducted using high-end
estimates of use and potential exposure providing a conservative,
health protective estimate of risk.
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). Novaluron 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 novaluron.
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 2,520 for adults
and 480 for children 1-2 years old. Because EPA's level of concern for
novaluron 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 aggregate exposure (food+drinking
water+residential) assessment was not conducted since residential
intermediate-term exposures are not likely due to the intermittent
nature of applications by homeowners.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, novaluron 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 novaluron residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (gas chromatography/electron-
capture detection (GC/ECD) method and a high-performance liquid
chromatography/ultraviolet (HPLC/UV) method) are 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 established an MRL for residues of novaluron in or on
immature soybean seed at 0.01 ppm. Immature soybean seed (edamame) is
not covered by soybean, seed; therefore, harmonization is not an issue
for the proposed soybean use. There is no Codex MRL for peanut.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
Based on analysis from the residue field trial data supporting the
petition and use of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development tolerance calculation procedures, EPA revised the proposed
tolerance on soybean, seed from 0.06 ppm to 0.07 ppm. Additionally, the
commodity term for peanuts is being revised.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of novaluron, N-
[[[3-chloro-4-[1,1,2-trifluoro-2-
(trifluoromethoxy)ethoxy]phenyl]amino]carbonyl]-2,6-difluorobenzamide,
in or on peanut and soybean, seed at 0.01 and 0.07 ppm, respectively.
This regulation additionally deletes the time-limited tolerance for
strawberry, as that tolerance expired on December 31, 2011.
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
[[Page 40033]]
``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: June 25, 2013.
G. Jeffrey Herndon,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. In Sec. 180.598:
0
a. Add alphabetically the commodities to the table in paragraph (a).
0
b. Remove and reserve paragraph (b).
Sec. 180.598 Novaluron; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Peanut.................................................. 0.01
* * * * *
Soybean, seed........................................... 0.07
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-15869 Filed 7-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P