Chlorantraniliprole; Pesticide Tolerances, 57280-57285 [2013-22593]
Download as PDF
57280
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of quinoxyfen (5,7-dichloro4-(4-fluorophen oxy)quinoline) in or on
berry, low growing, subgroup 13–07G at
1.0 ppm; fruit, small, vine climbing,
except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F
at 2.0 ppm; and vegetable, fruiting,
group 8–10 at 1.7 ppm.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Sep 17, 2013
Jkt 229001
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this final rule. In addition, this final
rule does not impose any enforceable
duty or contain any unfunded mandate
as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: September 9, 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 § 180.588 amend paragraph (a) as
follows:
■ i. Revise the introductory text,
■ ii. Remove entries for commodities:
‘‘Grape’’; ‘‘Pepper, bell’’; ‘‘Pepper,
nonbell’’; and ‘‘Strawberry’’, and
■ iii. Alphabetically add the following
commodities to the table.
The additions read as follows:
■
§ 180.588 Quinoxyfen; tolerance for
residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of the fungicide
quinoxyfen, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the following table.
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified in the following table is to be
determined by measuring only
quinoxyfen (5,7-dichloro-4-(4fluorophenoxy)quinoline).
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Berry, low growing, subgroup
13–07G .................................
Fruit, small vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup
13–07F ..................................
*
*
*
*
*
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
2.0
1.7
*
[FR Doc. 2013–22597 Filed 9–17–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0635; FRL–9395–1]
Chlorantraniliprole; Pesticide
Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of the insecticide
chlorantraniliprole in or on multiple
commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. In
addition, this regulation removes
established tolerances for certain
commodities/groups superseded by this
action. The Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR–4) requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
September 18, 2013. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before November 18, 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–2012–0635, 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
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\18SER1.SGM
18SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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: Lois
Rossi, Registration Division (7505P),
Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–7090 email address:
RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2012–0635 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 November 18, 2013. Addresses
for mail and hand delivery of objections
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Sep 17, 2013
Jkt 229001
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–
2012–0635, 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. Summary of Petitioned-for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of Wednesday,
November 7, 2012 (77 FR 66781) (FRL–
9367–5), 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 2E8064) by
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4), IR–4 Project Headquarters, 500
College Road East, Suite 201 W,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.628 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the insecticide
chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4chloro-2-methyl-6[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5carboxamide, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on cereal grain
group 15, except rice at 6.0 parts per
million (ppm); grain, cereal, forage,
fodder and straw, group 16 at 30.0 ppm;
fruit, citrus, group 10–10 at 1.4 ppm;
and fruit, pome, group 11–10 at 1.2
ppm. In addition, petition 2E8064
proposed, upon approval of above
tolerances, to remove established
tolerances in or on the raw agricultural
commodities/groups: Mayhaw at 0.6
ppm; field corn forage, field corn stover,
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
57281
pop corn forage, pop corn stover, sweet
corn forage, sweet corn stover at 14
ppm; field corn grain, pop corn grain at
0.04 ppm; sweet corn kernels plus cob
with husk removed at 0.02 ppm; field
corn milled byproducts at 0.1 ppm;
citrus fruit group 10 at 1.4 ppm; and
pome fruit group 11 except mayhaw at
1.2 ppm. That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by E.
I. DuPont de Nemours and Company,
DuPont Crop Protection, 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
modified, removed and/or established
chlorantraniliprole tolerances for certain
commodities. The reasons for these
changes are explained in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue . . . .’’
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for
chlorantraniliprole including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established
by this action. EPA’s assessment of
exposures and risks associated with
chlorantraniliprole follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as
E:\FR\FM\18SER1.SGM
18SER1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
57282
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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.
No mutagenicity concerns were
reported in the genotoxicity studies. Nor
does chlorantraniliprole exhibit
immunotoxicity, neurotoxicity,
carcinogenicity, or developmental
toxicity.
In oral and dermal toxicity studies in
rats, minimally increased
microvesiculation of adrenal cortex was
observed in males only; however,
supporting data demonstrated no effect
on the capacity of the adrenal gland to
produce corticosterone under either
basal or following adrenocorticotropic
hormone (ACTH) stimulation.
Therefore, adrenal cortex effects
observed in rat studies were not
considered adverse.
Chlorantraniliprole does not exhibit
pre- or postnatal toxicity as there were
no maternal or fetal effects in studies
conducted in rats and rabbits. The
relative absence of mammalian hazard
may be due in part to
chlorantranilprole’s selectivity for insect
ryanodine receptor (RyR) over
mammalian counterparts. In short-term
studies, the most consistent effects are
those associated with non-adverse
pharmacological response to the
xenobiotic, induction of liver enzymes
and subsequent increase in liver
weights.
Chlorantraniliprole is classified as
‘‘Not likely to be Carcinogenic to
Humans’’ based on the weight of
evidence of data: No treatment-related
tumors were reported in the submitted
chronic and oncogenicity studies in rats
and mice (18-month carcinogenicity
study) or in the subchronic studies in
mice, dogs and rats.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by chlorantraniliprole as
well as the no-observed-adverse-effectlevel (NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document
‘‘Chlorantraniliprole: Human Health
Risk Assessment for Proposed Uses on
Cereal Grains Group 15 (except Rice)
and Cereal Grains Forage, Fodder, and
Straw Group 16, and Conversion of
Citrus and Pome Fruit Groups,’’ dated
May 12, 2013 at p.25 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0635–
0005.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Sep 17, 2013
Jkt 229001
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which no adverse effects are
observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for chlorantraniliprole used
for human risk assessment is discussed
in Unit III.B of the final rule published
in the Federal Register of July 27, 2011
(76 FR 44815) (FRL–8875–5).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to chlorantraniliprole, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing chlorantraniliprole tolerances
in 40 CFR 180.628. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from chlorantraniliprole 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
chlorantraniliprole; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
EPA used the food consumption data
from the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) 2003–2008 National
Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey, What We Eat in America
(NHANES/WWEA). As to residue levels
in food, EPA assumed tolerance levels
residues for the proposed and registered
crops, and assumed 100 percent crop
treated (PCT). Where processing data
indicated a reduction (or no increase) in
residue upon processing, the residue
level of the raw agricultural commodity
(RAC) was used without reduction, for
example mint oil from spearmint.
Where processing data indicated an
increase in residue in the processed
commodity, tolerance-level residues
based on tolerances established for
those commodities were used, e.g.,
raisins from grapes. Where adequate
processing data did not exist, Dietary
Risk Evaluation System (DEEM) default
concentration factors were used if
available.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that chlorantraniliprole 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. EPA did
not use anticipated residue or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for chlorantraniliprole. Tolerance level
residues and 100 PCT were assumed for
all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for chlorantraniliprole in drinking
water. These simulation models take
into account data on the physical,
chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of chlorantraniliprole.
Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at
https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/
water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir
Screening Tool (FIRST), Pesticide Root
Zone Model/Exposure Analysis
Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS) and
Screening Concentration in Ground
Water (SCI–GROW) models, the
estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) of chlorantraniliprole for
chronic exposures for non-cancer
assessments are estimated to be 39.87
ppb for surface water and 0.842 ppb for
ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. No
acute dietary risk assessment was
E:\FR\FM\18SER1.SGM
18SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
performed because no acute hazard was
identified. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration
value of 39.87 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).
Chlorantraniliprole is currently
registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures:
Termiticide, sod farms/turf, landscape
ornamentals and interiorscapes.
Residential exposure is expected to
occur for short-term and intermediateterm durations; however, due to the lack
of toxicity identified for short- and
intermediate-term durations via relevant
routes of exposure, residential exposure
was not assessed. 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 chlorantraniliprole
to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and
chlorantraniliprole does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that chlorantraniliprole 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Sep 17, 2013
Jkt 229001
57283
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There were no effects on prenatal fetal
growth or postnatal development up to
the limit dose of 1,000 milligrams/
kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) in rats or
rabbits in the development or 2generation reproduction studies.
Moreover, there were no treatment
related effects on the numbers of litters,
fetuses (live or dead), resorptions, sex
ratio, or post-implantation loss. There
were no effects on fetal body weights,
skeletal ossification, and external,
visceral, or skeletal malformations or
variations.
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
chlorantraniliprole is complete.
ii. There is no indication that
chlorantraniliprole 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
chlorantraniliprole 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 assessment utilized
tolerance level residues for all crops and
assumed 100 PCT of the proposed and
registered crops were treated with
chlorantraniliprole. Default processing
factors were used as appropriate. EPA
made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground and surface
water modeling used to assess exposure
to chlorantraniliprole in drinking water.
Moreover, there is a lack of toxicity via
the dermal route, as well as the lack of
toxicity over the acute-, short- and
intermediate-term via the oral route.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by chlorantraniliprole.
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account acute
exposure estimates from dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, chlorantraniliprole
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
chlorantraniliprole from food and water
will utilize 6.3% of the cPAD for
children 1–2 years old, the population
group receiving the greatest exposure.
Based on the explanation in Unit
III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of chlorantraniliprole is not
expected.
3. Short-term and intermediate-term
risk. Short-term and intermediate-term
aggregate exposures take into account
short-term and intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Because no short-term or intermediateterm adverse effects were identified, the
aggregate short-term or intermediateterm risk is the same as the dietary risk,
which will not be greater than the
chronic aggregate risk.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
chlorantraniliprole is not expected to
pose a cancer risk to humans.
5. 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
chlorantraniliprole residues.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
Adequate enforcement methodology
(liquid chromatography mass
spectrometry (LC/MS/MS)); Method
DuPont-11374) is available to enforce
the tolerance expression.
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
E:\FR\FM\18SER1.SGM
18SER1
57284
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
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.
Codex has established
chlorantraniliprole maximum residue
limits (MRLs) for a number of crop and
animal commodities. The Codex MRLs
for cereal grains, citrus fruit, and pome
fruit are significantly lower than the
recommended corresponding US
tolerances. Because the permitted
domestic use on these crops in
accordance with the approved pesticide
label results in residue levels higher
than the Codex MRLs, the US tolerance
cannot be harmonized (lowered) since
doing so would result in residues in
excess of the approved tolerance in spite
of use consistent with label directions.
Because the US tolerances for cereal
grains are higher than the Codex MRLs
for cereal grains, the US livestock
tolerances at the values recommended
are necessary to encompass possible
residue levels from use of the pesticide
according to label directions.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
EPA converted, modified, removed
and/or established chlorantraniliprole
tolerances for certain commodities and,
in some cases, re-defined the crop group
tolerance expression and/or corrected
the commodity definition, as needed.
EPA determined that the proposed
tolerance for grain, cereal, group 15,
except rice at 6.0 ppm is not
appropriate. Establishing the proposed
tolerance would raise tolerance levels
for corn, field, grain; corn, pop, grain,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Sep 17, 2013
Jkt 229001
and corn, sweet, kernel plus cobs with
husk removed much in excess of their
actual residue levels: corn, field, grain
and corn, pop, grain at 0.04 ppm and
corn, sweet, kernel plus cobs with husk
removed at 0.02 ppm. Therefore, the
Agency determined that the grain,
cereal, group 15 tolerance must exclude
corn (including corn, field, grain; corn,
pop, grain; and corn, sweet), and redefined the crop group tolerance
expression as ‘‘grain, cereal, group 15,
except rice and corn’’ at 6.0 ppm.
Accordingly, although the petitioner
requested the removal of the established
tolerances for corn, field, grain at 0.04
ppm and corn, pop, grain at 0.04 ppm
and field corn milled byproducts at 0.1
ppm because they would be subsumed
within the proposed tolerance for grain,
cereal, group 15, EPA is not leaving
those tolerances in place.
Based on field trial data and using the
Organization of Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD) tolerance
calculation procedures, EPA determined
that the proposed tolerance on grain,
cereal, forage, fodder, and straw, group
16 at 30 ppm should be increased 40
ppm.
Upon the establishment of fruit,
pome, group 11–10, the petitioner
proposed that the tolerance for fruit,
pome, group 11 and mayhaw, be
deleted. The existing tolerance is for
fruit, pome, group 11, except mayhaw at
1.2 ppm and there is a separate
tolerance for mayhaw at 0.6 ppm. These
two tolerances will now be superseded
by establishment of the group tolerance
‘‘fruit, pome, group 11–10’’ at 1.2 ppm.
The tolerances for certain livestock
commodities were created or increased
because expanded use of
chlorantraniliprole to more cereal grains
and cereal grain forages, fodders, and
straws increased the dietary exposure of
livestock. The increased dietary
exposure of livestock necessitates
increased tolerances for cattle, sheep,
horse, and goat meat byproducts from
0.2 ppm to 0.5 ppm and for milk from
¥0.05 ppm to 0.1 ppm. Due to elevated
hog dietary exposure from the crop
group tolerance for grain, cereal, group
15, EPA established a hog, meat
tolerance at 0.02 ppm and increased
both the hog, fat and the hog, meat
byproducts tolerance from 0.02 to 0.05
ppm. Likewise, the grain, cereal, group
15 elevated the laying hen dietary
exposure and, consequently, the Agency
set a tolerance for poultry, meat at 0.05
ppm and increased the tolerance for egg
from 0.2 to 1.0 ppm; poultry, fat from
0.01 to 0.2 ppm; and poultry, meat
byproducts from 0.02 to 0.2 ppm. In
accordance with the Agency commodity
terminology, EPA is re-defining existing
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
animal ‘‘meat byproducts, except liver’’
tolerances to ‘‘meat byproducts’’, which
includes liver. Thus, EPA is deleting
separate tolerances for goat, liver, horse,
liver, and sheep, liver since they are
covered by the respective meat
byproducts tolerances.
Lastly, at 180.628(d), the Agency
removed the entry for commodity
‘‘Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw,
group 16 at 0.20 ppm, with expiration/
revocation date of 04/10/14, as this
time-limited tolerance is superseded by
this action.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of chlorantraniliprole, 3bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5carboxamide, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on Cattle, meat
byproducts at 0.5 parts per million
(ppm); Egg at 1.0 ppm; Fruit, citrus,
group 10–10 at 1.4 ppm; Fruit, pome,
group 11–10 at 1.2 ppm; Goat, meat
byproducts at 0.5 ppm; Grain, cereal,
group 15, except rice and corn at 6.0
ppm; Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and
straw, group 16 at 40.0 ppm; Hog, fat at
0.05 ppm; Hog, meat at 0.02 ppm; Hog,
meat byproducts at 0.05 ppm; Horse,
meat byproducts at 0.5 ppm; Milk at 0.1
ppm; Poultry, fat at 0.2 ppm; Poultry,
meat at 0.05 ppm; Poultry, meat
byproducts at 0.2 ppm; and Sheep, meat
byproducts at 0.5 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this final rule
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This final rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
E:\FR\FM\18SER1.SGM
18SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 18, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 tolerances 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).
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder
and straw, group 16 ..............
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
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).
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
[Amended]
2. Section 180.628, the table in
paragraph (a), is amended as follows:
■ i. Remove the following commodities:
‘‘Cattle, liver’’; ‘‘Cattle, meat
byproducts, except liver’’; ‘‘Corn, field
forage’’; ‘‘Corn, field, stover’’; ‘‘Corn,
pop, forage’’; ‘‘Corn, pop, stover’’;
‘‘Corn, sweet, forage’’; ‘‘Corn, sweet,
stover’’; ‘‘Fruit, citrus group 10’’; ‘‘Fruit,
pome group 11, except mayhaw’’; ‘‘Goat,
liver’’; ‘‘Goat, meat byproducts, except
liver’’; ‘‘Horse, liver’’; ‘‘Horse, meat
byproducts, except liver’’; ‘‘Mayhaw’’;
‘‘Sheep, liver’’; and ‘‘Sheep, meat
byproducts, except liver.’’
■ ii. Revise the following commodities:
‘‘Egg’’; ‘‘Hog, fat’’; ‘‘Hog, meat
byproducts’’; ‘‘Milk’’; ‘‘Poultry, fat’’; and
‘‘Poultry, meat byproducts.’’
■ iii. Add alphabetically the
commodities: ‘‘Cattle, meat
byproducts’’; ‘‘Fruit, citrus, group 10–
10’’; ‘‘Fruit, pome, group 11–10’’; ‘‘Goat,
meat byproducts’’; ‘‘Grain, cereal,
except rice and corn, group 15’’; ‘‘Grain,
cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group
16’’; ‘‘Hog, meat’’; ‘‘Horse, meat
byproducts’’; Poultry, meat’’; and
‘‘Sheep, meat byproducts.’’
■ 3. Section 180.628, the table in
paragraph (d) is amended by removing
the entry ‘‘Grain, cereal, forage, fodder
and straw, group 16.’’
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
■
(a) General. * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Cattle, meat byproducts ...........
*
*
*
*
*
Fruit, citrus, group 10–10 .........
Fruit, pome, group 11–10 .........
*
*
*
*
*
Goat, meat byproducts .............
*
*
*
*
*
Grain, cereal, except rice and
corn, group 15 .......................
*
0.5
1.4
1.2
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:23 Sep 17, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40
*
*
*
*
Hog, fat .....................................
Hog, meat .................................
Hog, meat byproducts ..............
PART 180—[AMENDED]
§ 180.628
Parts per
million
Commodity
§ 180.628 Chlorantraniliprole; tolerances
for residues.
VII. Congressional Review Act
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Dated: September 9, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
57285
0.5
6.0
*
0.05
0.02
0.05
*
*
*
*
Horse, meat byproducts ...........
*
*
*
*
*
Milk ...........................................
*
*
*
*
*
Poultry, fat ................................
Poultry, meat ............................
Poultry, meat byproducts ..........
*
0.2
0.05
0.2
*
*
*
*
Sheep meat byproducts ...........
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.5
0.1
0.5
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–22593 Filed 9–17–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0383; FRL–9398–4]
2,5-Furandione, Polymer With
Ethenylbenzene, Hydrolyzed, 3(Dimethylamino)propyl Imide, Imide
With Polyethylene-Polypropylene
Glycol 2-Aminopropyl Me Ether, 2,2′(1,2-Diazenediyl)bis[2Methylbutanenitrile]-Initiated;
Tolerance Exemption
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of 2,5-furandione,
polymer with ethenylbenzene,
hydrolyzed, 3-(dimethylamino)propyl
imide, imide with polyethylenepolypropylene glycol 2-aminopropyl me
ether, 2,2′-(1,2-diazenediyl)bis[2methylbutanenitrile]-initiated (CAS Reg.
No. 1062609–13–5) when used as an
inert ingredient in a pesticide
formulation. Evonik Goldschmidt
Corporation (Evonik) submitted a
petition to EPA under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
requesting an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of 2,5-furandione, polymer
with ethenylbenzene, hydrolyzed, 3-
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\18SER1.SGM
18SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 18, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57280-57285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22593]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0635; FRL-9395-1]
Chlorantraniliprole; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of the
insecticide chlorantraniliprole in or on multiple commodities which are
identified and discussed later in this document. In addition, this
regulation removes established tolerances for certain commodities/
groups superseded by this action. The Interregional Research Project
Number 4 (IR-4) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective September 18, 2013. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before November 18, 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-2012-0635, 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
[[Page 57281]]
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: Lois Rossi, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-7090 email address: RDFRNotices@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-2012-0635 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
November 18, 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-2012-0635, 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. Summary of Petitioned-for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of Wednesday, November 7, 2012 (77 FR
66781) (FRL-9367-5), 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 2E8064) by Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4),
IR-4 Project Headquarters, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.628 be
amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide
chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-
[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-
carboxamide, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on cereal
grain group 15, except rice at 6.0 parts per million (ppm); grain,
cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16 at 30.0 ppm; fruit, citrus,
group 10-10 at 1.4 ppm; and fruit, pome, group 11-10 at 1.2 ppm. In
addition, petition 2E8064 proposed, upon approval of above tolerances,
to remove established tolerances in or on the raw agricultural
commodities/groups: Mayhaw at 0.6 ppm; field corn forage, field corn
stover, pop corn forage, pop corn stover, sweet corn forage, sweet corn
stover at 14 ppm; field corn grain, pop corn grain at 0.04 ppm; sweet
corn kernels plus cob with husk removed at 0.02 ppm; field corn milled
byproducts at 0.1 ppm; citrus fruit group 10 at 1.4 ppm; and pome fruit
group 11 except mayhaw at 1.2 ppm. That document referenced a summary
of the petition prepared by E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, DuPont
Crop Protection, 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
modified, removed and/or established chlorantraniliprole tolerances for
certain commodities. The reasons for these changes are explained in
Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue . .
. .''
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for chlorantraniliprole including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with
chlorantraniliprole follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as
[[Page 57282]]
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.
No mutagenicity concerns were reported in the genotoxicity studies.
Nor does chlorantraniliprole exhibit immunotoxicity, neurotoxicity,
carcinogenicity, or developmental toxicity.
In oral and dermal toxicity studies in rats, minimally increased
microvesiculation of adrenal cortex was observed in males only;
however, supporting data demonstrated no effect on the capacity of the
adrenal gland to produce corticosterone under either basal or following
adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) stimulation. Therefore, adrenal
cortex effects observed in rat studies were not considered adverse.
Chlorantraniliprole does not exhibit pre- or postnatal toxicity as
there were no maternal or fetal effects in studies conducted in rats
and rabbits. The relative absence of mammalian hazard may be due in
part to chlorantranilprole's selectivity for insect ryanodine receptor
(RyR) over mammalian counterparts. In short-term studies, the most
consistent effects are those associated with non-adverse
pharmacological response to the xenobiotic, induction of liver enzymes
and subsequent increase in liver weights.
Chlorantraniliprole is classified as ``Not likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans'' based on the weight of evidence of data: No
treatment-related tumors were reported in the submitted chronic and
oncogenicity studies in rats and mice (18-month carcinogenicity study)
or in the subchronic studies in mice, dogs and rats.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by chlorantraniliprole 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 ``Chlorantraniliprole: Human Health
Risk Assessment for Proposed Uses on Cereal Grains Group 15 (except
Rice) and Cereal Grains Forage, Fodder, and Straw Group 16, and
Conversion of Citrus and Pome Fruit Groups,'' dated May 12, 2013 at
p.25 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0635-0005.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for chlorantraniliprole
used for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B of the final
rule published in the Federal Register of July 27, 2011 (76 FR 44815)
(FRL-8875-5).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to chlorantraniliprole, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing chlorantraniliprole
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.628. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
chlorantraniliprole 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
chlorantraniliprole; 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 United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2003-2008 National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEA). As
to residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance levels residues for
the proposed and registered crops, and assumed 100 percent crop treated
(PCT). Where processing data indicated a reduction (or no increase) in
residue upon processing, the residue level of the raw agricultural
commodity (RAC) was used without reduction, for example mint oil from
spearmint. Where processing data indicated an increase in residue in
the processed commodity, tolerance-level residues based on tolerances
established for those commodities were used, e.g., raisins from grapes.
Where adequate processing data did not exist, Dietary Risk Evaluation
System (DEEM) default concentration factors were used if available.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that chlorantraniliprole 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.
EPA did not use anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary
assessment for chlorantraniliprole. Tolerance level residues and 100
PCT were assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for chlorantraniliprole in drinking water. These simulation
models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of chlorantraniliprole. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure
assessment can be found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST),
Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/
EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models,
the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
chlorantraniliprole for chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments
are estimated to be 39.87 ppb for surface water and 0.842 ppb for
ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. No acute dietary risk
assessment was
[[Page 57283]]
performed because no acute hazard was identified. For chronic dietary
risk assessment, the water concentration value of 39.87 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).
Chlorantraniliprole is currently registered for the following uses
that could result in residential exposures: Termiticide, sod farms/
turf, landscape ornamentals and interiorscapes. Residential exposure is
expected to occur for short-term and intermediate-term durations;
however, due to the lack of toxicity identified for short- and
intermediate-term durations via relevant routes of exposure,
residential exposure was not assessed. 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 chlorantraniliprole to share a common mechanism
of toxicity with any other substances, and chlorantraniliprole does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For
the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
chlorantraniliprole does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There were no effects on
prenatal fetal growth or postnatal development up to the limit dose of
1,000 milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) in rats or rabbits in the
development or 2-generation reproduction studies. Moreover, there were
no treatment related effects on the numbers of litters, fetuses (live
or dead), resorptions, sex ratio, or post-implantation loss. There were
no effects on fetal body weights, skeletal ossification, and external,
visceral, or skeletal malformations or variations.
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 chlorantraniliprole is complete.
ii. There is no indication that chlorantraniliprole 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 chlorantraniliprole 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 assessment utilized tolerance level
residues for all crops and assumed 100 PCT of the proposed and
registered crops were treated with chlorantraniliprole. Default
processing factors were used as appropriate. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to chlorantraniliprole in drinking water. Moreover,
there is a lack of toxicity via the dermal route, as well as the lack
of toxicity over the acute-, short- and intermediate-term via the oral
route. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by chlorantraniliprole.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
chlorantraniliprole 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
chlorantraniliprole from food and water will utilize 6.3% of the cPAD
for children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
chlorantraniliprole is not expected.
3. Short-term and intermediate-term risk. Short-term and
intermediate-term aggregate exposures take into account short-term and
intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Because no
short-term or intermediate-term adverse effects were identified, the
aggregate short-term or intermediate-term risk is the same as the
dietary risk, which will not be greater than the chronic aggregate
risk.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, chlorantraniliprole is not expected to pose a cancer risk to
humans.
5. 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 chlorantraniliprole residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (liquid chromatography mass
spectrometry (LC/MS/MS)); Method DuPont-11374) is available to enforce
the tolerance expression.
[[Page 57284]]
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.
Codex has established chlorantraniliprole maximum residue limits
(MRLs) for a number of crop and animal commodities. The Codex MRLs for
cereal grains, citrus fruit, and pome fruit are significantly lower
than the recommended corresponding US tolerances. Because the permitted
domestic use on these crops in accordance with the approved pesticide
label results in residue levels higher than the Codex MRLs, the US
tolerance cannot be harmonized (lowered) since doing so would result in
residues in excess of the approved tolerance in spite of use consistent
with label directions. Because the US tolerances for cereal grains are
higher than the Codex MRLs for cereal grains, the US livestock
tolerances at the values recommended are necessary to encompass
possible residue levels from use of the pesticide according to label
directions.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
EPA converted, modified, removed and/or established
chlorantraniliprole tolerances for certain commodities and, in some
cases, re-defined the crop group tolerance expression and/or corrected
the commodity definition, as needed.
EPA determined that the proposed tolerance for grain, cereal, group
15, except rice at 6.0 ppm is not appropriate. Establishing the
proposed tolerance would raise tolerance levels for corn, field, grain;
corn, pop, grain, and corn, sweet, kernel plus cobs with husk removed
much in excess of their actual residue levels: corn, field, grain and
corn, pop, grain at 0.04 ppm and corn, sweet, kernel plus cobs with
husk removed at 0.02 ppm. Therefore, the Agency determined that the
grain, cereal, group 15 tolerance must exclude corn (including corn,
field, grain; corn, pop, grain; and corn, sweet), and re-defined the
crop group tolerance expression as ``grain, cereal, group 15, except
rice and corn'' at 6.0 ppm. Accordingly, although the petitioner
requested the removal of the established tolerances for corn, field,
grain at 0.04 ppm and corn, pop, grain at 0.04 ppm and field corn
milled byproducts at 0.1 ppm because they would be subsumed within the
proposed tolerance for grain, cereal, group 15, EPA is not leaving
those tolerances in place.
Based on field trial data and using the Organization of Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) tolerance calculation procedures,
EPA determined that the proposed tolerance on grain, cereal, forage,
fodder, and straw, group 16 at 30 ppm should be increased 40 ppm.
Upon the establishment of fruit, pome, group 11-10, the petitioner
proposed that the tolerance for fruit, pome, group 11 and mayhaw, be
deleted. The existing tolerance is for fruit, pome, group 11, except
mayhaw at 1.2 ppm and there is a separate tolerance for mayhaw at 0.6
ppm. These two tolerances will now be superseded by establishment of
the group tolerance ``fruit, pome, group 11-10'' at 1.2 ppm.
The tolerances for certain livestock commodities were created or
increased because expanded use of chlorantraniliprole to more cereal
grains and cereal grain forages, fodders, and straws increased the
dietary exposure of livestock. The increased dietary exposure of
livestock necessitates increased tolerances for cattle, sheep, horse,
and goat meat byproducts from 0.2 ppm to 0.5 ppm and for milk from -
0.05 ppm to 0.1 ppm. Due to elevated hog dietary exposure from the crop
group tolerance for grain, cereal, group 15, EPA established a hog,
meat tolerance at 0.02 ppm and increased both the hog, fat and the hog,
meat byproducts tolerance from 0.02 to 0.05 ppm. Likewise, the grain,
cereal, group 15 elevated the laying hen dietary exposure and,
consequently, the Agency set a tolerance for poultry, meat at 0.05 ppm
and increased the tolerance for egg from 0.2 to 1.0 ppm; poultry, fat
from 0.01 to 0.2 ppm; and poultry, meat byproducts from 0.02 to 0.2
ppm. In accordance with the Agency commodity terminology, EPA is re-
defining existing animal ``meat byproducts, except liver'' tolerances
to ``meat byproducts'', which includes liver. Thus, EPA is deleting
separate tolerances for goat, liver, horse, liver, and sheep, liver
since they are covered by the respective meat byproducts tolerances.
Lastly, at 180.628(d), the Agency removed the entry for commodity
``Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16 at 0.20 ppm, with
expiration/revocation date of 04/10/14, as this time-limited tolerance
is superseded by this action.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
chlorantraniliprole, 3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6-
[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-
carboxamide, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on Cattle,
meat byproducts at 0.5 parts per million (ppm); Egg at 1.0 ppm; Fruit,
citrus, group 10-10 at 1.4 ppm; Fruit, pome, group 11-10 at 1.2 ppm;
Goat, meat byproducts at 0.5 ppm; Grain, cereal, group 15, except rice
and corn at 6.0 ppm; Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16
at 40.0 ppm; Hog, fat at 0.05 ppm; Hog, meat at 0.02 ppm; Hog, meat
byproducts at 0.05 ppm; Horse, meat byproducts at 0.5 ppm; Milk at 0.1
ppm; Poultry, fat at 0.2 ppm; Poultry, meat at 0.05 ppm; Poultry, meat
byproducts at 0.2 ppm; and Sheep, meat byproducts at 0.5 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d)
in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has
been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule
is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain
any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
[[Page 57285]]
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 tolerances in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: September 9, 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.
Sec. 180.628 [Amended]
0
2. Section 180.628, the table in paragraph (a), is amended as follows:
0
i. Remove the following commodities: ``Cattle, liver''; ``Cattle, meat
byproducts, except liver''; ``Corn, field forage''; ``Corn, field,
stover''; ``Corn, pop, forage''; ``Corn, pop, stover''; ``Corn, sweet,
forage''; ``Corn, sweet, stover''; ``Fruit, citrus group 10''; ``Fruit,
pome group 11, except mayhaw''; ``Goat, liver''; ``Goat, meat
byproducts, except liver''; ``Horse, liver''; ``Horse, meat byproducts,
except liver''; ``Mayhaw''; ``Sheep, liver''; and ``Sheep, meat
byproducts, except liver.''
0
ii. Revise the following commodities: ``Egg''; ``Hog, fat''; ``Hog,
meat byproducts''; ``Milk''; ``Poultry, fat''; and ``Poultry, meat
byproducts.''
0
iii. Add alphabetically the commodities: ``Cattle, meat byproducts'';
``Fruit, citrus, group 10-10''; ``Fruit, pome, group 11-10''; ``Goat,
meat byproducts''; ``Grain, cereal, except rice and corn, group 15'';
``Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16''; ``Hog, meat'';
``Horse, meat byproducts''; Poultry, meat''; and ``Sheep, meat
byproducts.''
0
3. Section 180.628, the table in paragraph (d) is amended by removing
the entry ``Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16.''
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 180.628 Chlorantraniliprole; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Cattle, meat byproducts.................................... 0.5
* * * * *
Fruit, citrus, group 10-10................................. 1.4
Fruit, pome, group 11-10................................... 1.2
* * * * *
Goat, meat byproducts...................................... 0.5
* * * * *
Grain, cereal, except rice and corn, group 15.............. 6.0
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group 16.......... 40
* * * * *
Hog, fat................................................... 0.05
Hog, meat.................................................. 0.02
Hog, meat byproducts....................................... 0.05
* * * * *
Horse, meat byproducts..................................... 0.5
* * * * *
Milk....................................................... 0.1
* * * * *
Poultry, fat............................................... 0.2
Poultry, meat.............................................. 0.05
Poultry, meat byproducts................................... 0.2
* * * * *
Sheep meat byproducts...................................... 0.5
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-22593 Filed 9-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P