Tebuconazole; Pesticide Tolerances, 68741-68748 [2013-27147]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 221 / Friday, November 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Issued in Washington, DC, on this day of
November 12, 2013.
Judith Starr,
General Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2013–27385 Filed 11–14–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7709–02–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0427; FRL–9392–1]
Tebuconazole; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of tebuconazole
in or on the fruiting vegetable group 8–
10 and amends the existing tolerances
for barley grain and the cucurbit
vegetable group 9. Interregional
Research Project Number 4 (IR–4)
requested this tolerance and amendment
under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
November 15, 2013. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before January 14, 2014, 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–2012–0427, 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: 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:
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:51 Nov 14, 2013
Jkt 232001
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 eCFR
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–2012–0427 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 January 14, 2014. 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–
2012–0427, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
68741
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 August 22,
2012 (77 FR 50661) (FRL–9358–9), EPA
issued a document pursuant to FFDCA
section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3),
announcing the filing of a pesticide
petition (PP 2E8012) by Interregional
Research Project Number 4 (IR–4), 500
College Road East, Suite 201W.,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.474 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the fungicide tebuconazole,
alpha-[2-(4-chlorophenyl)ethyl]-alpha(1,1-dimethylethyl)-1H-1,2,4-triazole-1ethanol, including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on barley, grain at 0.3
parts per million (ppm); vegetable,
cucurbit group 9 at 0.4 ppm; and
vegetable, fruiting group 8–10 at 1.3
ppm. The petition also requested the
removal of the established tolerance, in
or on vegetable, fruiting, group 8 at 1.3
ppm once the proposed tolerance for
vegetable, fruiting group 8–10 at 1.3
ppm, has been established since the
proposed new tolerance will supersede
the existing tolerance. That document
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Bayer CropScience, the
registrant, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
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
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
68742
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 221 / Friday, November 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 tebuconazole
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with tebuconazole 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.
Tebuconazole has low acute toxicity
by the oral and dermal routes of
exposure and moderate toxicity by the
inhalation route. It is not a dermal
sensitizer nor a dermal irritant;
however, it is slightly to mildly
irritating to the eye. The primary target
organs of tebuconazole toxicity are the
liver, the adrenals, the hematopoietic
system, and the nervous system. Effects
on these target organs were seen in both
rodent and non-rodent species. In
addition, ocular lesions were seen in
dogs (including lenticular degeneration
and increased cataract formation)
following subchronic or chronic
exposure.
Oral administration of tebuconazole
caused developmental toxicity in all
species evaluated (rat, rabbit and
mouse), with the most prominent effects
in the nervous system. The
developmental toxicity studies,
including the developmental
neurotoxicity study, demonstrated an
increase in susceptibility in developing
fetuses both quantitatively and
qualitatively.
Tebuconazole was classified as a
Group C possible human carcinogen,
based on an increase in the incidence of
hepatocellular adenomas, carcinomas,
and combined adenomas/carcinomas in
male and female mice. This
classification is generally used for
chemicals with limited evidence of
carcinogenicity in animals in the
absence of human data. EPA has
determined that quantification of risk
using a non-linear approach, i.e.,
reference dose (RfD), for tebuconazole
will adequately account for all chronic
toxicity, including carcinogenicity, that
could result from exposure to
tebuconazole. That conclusion is based
on the following considerations: (1) No
carcinogenic response was seen in
either sex in an acceptable rat cancer
study; (2) the tumors found in the
mouse are commonly seen in the mouse;
(3) both tumors types were found only
at the high dose, which was considered
to be excessive for carcinogenicity
testing based on the non-neoplastic
findings; and (4) tebuconazole is not
mutagenic.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by tebuconazole 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 docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0427 on
pages 33–36 of the document titled
‘‘Tebuconazole: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Tolerance Increases
Based on Submission of Condition of
Registration Requirements for Barley
and Cantaloupe; and Crop Group
Expansion for Fruiting Vegetable Crop
Group 8–10.’’
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 tebuconazole used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR TEBUCONAZOLE FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for risk
assessment
Study and toxicological effects
Acute dietary (General
population including infants and children).
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Exposure/scenario
LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF (UFL) = 3x
LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF (UFL) = 3x
LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF (UFL) = 3x
Acute RfD = 0.029 mg/
kg/day.
aPAD = 0.029 mg/kg/
day
Chronic RfD = 0.029 mg/
kg/day.
cPAD = 0.029 mg/kg/day
Developmental Neurotoxicity Study—Rat. LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/
day based on decreases in body weights, absolute brain
weights, brain measurements and motor activity in offspring.
LOC for MOE = 300 ......
Developmental Neurotoxicity Study—Rat. LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/
day based on decreases in body weights, absolute brain
weights, brain measurements and motor activity in offspring.
Chronic dietary (All populations).
Incidental oral short-term
(1 to 30 days).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:51 Nov 14, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Developmental Neurotoxicity Study—Rat. LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/
day based on decreases in body weights, absolute brain
weights, brain measurements and motor activity in offspring.
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 221 / Friday, November 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
68743
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR TEBUCONAZOLE FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT—Continued
Exposure/scenario
Dermal short-term (1 to
30 days).
Inhalation short-term (1
to 30 days).
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for risk
assessment
Study and toxicological effects
Oral study LOAEL =
8.8mg/kg/day (dermal
absorption rate = 13%.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF (UFL ) = 3x
Oral study LOAEL = 8.8
mg/kg/day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF (UFL) = 3x
LOC for MOE = 300 ......
Developmental Neurotoxicity Study—Rat. LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/
day based on decreases in body weights, absolute brain
weights, brain measurements and motor activity in offspring.
LOC for MOE = 300 ......
Developmental Neurotoxicity Study—Rat. LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/
day based on decreases in body weights, absolute brain
weights, brain measurements and motor activity in offspring.
Classification: Group C- possible human carcinogen based on statistically significant increase in the incidence of
hepatocellular adenoma, carcinoma, and combined adenoma/carcinomas in both sexes of NMRI mice. The chronic
risk assessment is considered to be protective of any cancer effects; therefore, a separate quantitative cancer risk
assessment is not required.
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). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to tebuconazole, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing tebuconzole tolerances in 40
CFR 180.474. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from tebuconazole 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.
Such effects were identified for
tebuconazole. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food
consumption information from the
United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) 2003–2008 National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We
Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As
to residue levels in food, a somewhat
refined, acute probabilistic dietary
exposure assessment was conducted for
all existing food uses of tebuconazole.
EPA assumed tolerance levels residues
for some commodities and used field
trial and USDA PDP data for others.
EPA also assumed 100% crop treated
levels for most commodities and used
percent crop treated (PCT) data for other
commodities as described in Unit
III.C.1.iv. below.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, EPA used the food
consumption data from the 2003–2008
NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:51 Nov 14, 2013
Jkt 232001
in food, a somewhat refined chronic
dietary exposure assessment was
conducted for all existing food uses of
tebuconazole. EPA assumed tolerance
levels residues for some commodities
and used field trial and USDA PDP data
for others. EPA also assumed 100% crop
treated levels for most commodities and
used PCT data for other commodities as
described in Unit III.C.1.iv. below.
iii. Cancer. The Agency determined
that cancer dietary risk concerns due to
long-term consumption of tebuconazole
residues are adequately addressed by
the chronic dietary exposure analysis
using the reference dose; i.e., the
chronic dietary risk assessment is
considered to be protective of any
cancer effects, and therefore, a separate
cancer dietary exposure analysis was
not performed.
iv. Anticipated residue and 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 CallIns 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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.
For the acute assessment, the Agency
estimated the PCT for existing uses as
follows:
Grapes: 25%; grape, raisin: 25%;
nectarine: 25%; peach: 20%; peanuts:
45%.
For the chronic assessment, the
Agency estimated the PCT for existing
uses as follows:
Grapes: 15%; grape, raisin: 15%;
nectarine: 20%; peach: 15%; peanuts:
35%.
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
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
68744
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 221 / Friday, November 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 1.
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 also used 2006 PCT
information for tebuconazole on the
following uses for the acute dietary
assessment (apples, 44%; apricots 56%;
cherries, (babyfood), 42%; cherries (all
other food forms), 100%; corn, sweet,
22%; hops 64%; plum 26%; turnip
68%) and for the chronic dietary
assessment (apples, 41%; apricots, 43%;
cherries, (babyfood), 37%; cherries (all
other food forms), 66%; corn, sweet,
14%; hops, 64%; plum, 24%; turnip,
44%). For further explanation of EPA’s
process for developing these PCT
estimates, see the 2011 final rule for
tebuconazole tolerances (76 FR 54127)
(August 31, 2011) and its supporting
documents.
Subsequently, EPA considered the
maximum and average PCT estimates
for tebuconazole from the most recent
(2011) screening level usage analysis
available. Based on that information,
EPA concludes that its risk assessments
do not underestimate the overall actual
PCT for uses of tebuconazole or
exposure from the use of tebuconazole.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:51 Nov 14, 2013
Jkt 232001
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 tebuconazole may be applied in
a particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for tebuconazole in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
tebuconazole. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI–
GROW) models, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of
tebuconazole for acute exposures are
estimated to be 96.6 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 1.56 ppb for
ground water and for chronic exposures
are estimated to be 59 ppb for surface
water and 1.56 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For the
acute dietary risk assessment a
distribution of 30-year daily surface
water concentrations was estimated for
the EDWCs of tebuconazole. For chronic
dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration of value 59 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).
Tebuconazole is currently registered
for the following uses that could result
in residential exposures: Turf, flower
gardens, trees, ornamentals, and
pressure-treated wood. EPA assessed
residential exposure using the following
assumptions: For residential handlers,
exposure is expected to be short-term.
Intermediate-term exposures are not
likely because of the intermittent nature
of applications by homeowners. Dermal
and inhalation exposures were
combined since the same endpoint and
point of departure (POD) is used for
both routes of exposure. Residential
dermal and incidental oral postapplication exposure was assessed for
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
adults and children golfing, working in
gardens, and performing physical
activities on pressure-treated wood after
application of tebuconazole may receive
exposure to tebuconazole residues. Postapplication exposure is expected to be
short-term in duration. 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.’’
Tebuconazole is a member of the
triazole-containing class of pesticides,
the conazoles. Although conazoles act
similarly in plants by inhibiting
ergosterol biosynthesis, there is not
necessarily a relationship between their
pesticidal activity and their mechanism
of toxicity in mammals. Structural
similarities do not constitute a common
mechanism of toxicity. Evidence is
needed to establish that the chemicals
operate by the same, or essentially the
same, sequence of major biochemical
events. In conazoles, however, a
variable pattern of toxicological
responses is found; some are
hepatotoxic and hepatocarcinogenic in
mice. Some induce thyroid tumors in
rats. Some induce developmental,
reproductive, and neurological effects in
rodents. Furthermore, the conazoles
produce a diverse range of biochemical
events, including altered cholesterol
levels, stress responses, and altered
DNA methylation. It is not clearly
understood whether these biochemical
events are directly connected to their
toxicological outcomes. Thus, there is
currently no conclusive data to indicate
that conazoles share common
mechanisms of toxicity and EPA is not
following a cumulative risk approach
based on a common mechanism of
toxicity for the conazoles. For
information regarding EPA’s procedures
for cumulating effects from substances
found to have a common mechanism of
toxicity, see EPA’s Web site at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
Tebuconazole is a triazole-derived
pesticide. This class of compounds can
form the common metabolite 1,2,4triazole and two triazole conjugates
(triazolylalanine and triazolylacetic
acid). To support existing tolerances
and to establish new tolerances for
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 221 / Friday, November 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
triazole-derivative pesticides, including
tebuconazole, EPA conducted a human
health risk assessment for exposure to
1,2,4-triazole, triazolylalanine, and
triazolylacetic acid resulting from the
use of all current and pending uses of
any triazole-derived fungicide. The risk
assessment is a highly conservative,
screening-level evaluation in terms of
hazards associated with common
metabolites (e.g., use of a maximum
combination of uncertainty factors) and
potential dietary and non-dietary
exposures (i.e., high end estimates of
both dietary and non-dietary exposures).
In addition, the Agency retained the
additional 10X FQPA safety factor for
the protection of infants and children.
The assessment includes evaluations of
risks for various subgroups, including
those comprised of infants and children.
The Agency’s complete risk assessment
is found in the propiconazole
reregistration docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–0497.
An updated dietary exposure and risk
analysis for the common triazole
metabolites 1,2,4-triazole (T),
triazolylalanine (TA), triazolylacetic
acid (TAA), and triazolylpyruvic acid
(TP) was conducted and completed in
May 2013, in association with a
registration request for several other
triazole fungicides. That analysis
concluded that risk estimates were
below the Agency’s level of concern for
all population groups. After addition of
tolerances associated with this action to
the exposure analyses, the increased
tolerances for tebuconazole in/on
barley, grain and vegetables, cucurbits,
group 9 along with the crop group
conversion covered by this action do not
significantly https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for the following titles and
docket numbers: ‘‘Common Triazole
Metabolites: Updated Aggregate Human
Health Risk Assessment to Address The
New Section 3 Registrations For Use of
Prothioconazole on Bushberry Crop
Subgroup 13–07B, Low Growing Berry,
Except Strawberry, Crop Subgroup 13–
07H, and Cucurbit Vegetables Crop
Group 9; Use of Flutriafol on Coffee; and
Ipconazole on Crop Group 6’’ (located in
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–
0876); ‘‘Common Triazole Metabolites:
Updated Dietary (Food + Water)
Exposure and Risk Assessment to
Address the Revised Tolerance for
Residues of Fenbuconazole in Peppers’’
(docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2012–0520).
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:51 Nov 14, 2013
Jkt 232001
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 toxicity database for tebuconazole
includes prenatal developmental
toxicity studies in three species (mouse,
rat, and rabbit), a reproductive toxicity
study in rats, acute and subchronic
neurotoxicity studies in rats, and a
developmental neurotoxicity study in
rats. The data from prenatal
developmental toxicity studies in mice
and a developmental neurotoxicity
study in rats indicated an increased
quantitative and qualitative
susceptibility following in utero
exposure to tebuconazole. The NOAELs/
LOAELs for developmental toxicity in
these studies were found at dose levels
less than those that induce maternal
toxicity or in the presence of slight
maternal toxicity. There was no
indication of increased quantitative
susceptibility in the rat and rabbit
developmental toxicity studies, the
NOAELs for developmental toxicity
were comparable to or higher than the
NOAELs for maternal toxicity. In all
three species, however, there was
indication of increased qualitative
susceptibility. For most studies,
minimal maternal toxicity was seen at
the LOAEL (consisting of increases in
hematological findings in mice,
increased liver weights in rabbits and
rats, and decreased body weight gain/
food consumption in rats) and did not
increase substantially in severity at
higher doses. However, there was more
concern for the developmental effects at
each LOAEL, which included increases
in runts, increased fetal loss, and
malformations in mice; increased
skeletal variations in rats; and increased
fetal loss and frank malformations in
rabbits. Additionally, more severe
developmental effects (including frank
malformations) were seen at higher
doses in mice, rats and rabbits. In the
developmental neurotoxicity study,
maternal toxicity was seen only at the
high dose (decreased body weights,
body weight gains, and food
consumption, prolonged gestation with
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
68745
mortality, and increased number of dead
fetuses), while offspring toxicity
(including decreases in body weight,
brain weight, brain measurements and
functional activities) was seen at all
doses.
Available data indicated greater
sensitivity of the developing organism
to exposure to tebuconazole, as
demonstrated by increases in qualitative
sensitivity in prenatal developmental
toxicity studies in rats, mice, and
rabbits, and by increases in both
qualitative and quantitative sensitivity
in the developmental neurotoxicity
study in rats with tebuconazole.
However, the degree of concern is low
because the toxic endpoints in the
prenatal developmental toxicity studies
were well characterized with clear
NOAELs established and the most
sensitive endpoint, which is found in
the developmental neurotoxicity study,
has been used for overall risk
assessments. Therefore, there are no
residual uncertainties for prenatal and/
or postnatal susceptibility.
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 3x. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for
tebuconazole is considered complete.
An immunotoxicity study in rats has
been submitted to the Agency and the
study is currently under review. With
preliminary evaluation, tebuconazole
tested up to 1,000 ppm (78.4
milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day)
produced no immunotoxicity under the
conditions of this study.
ii. Tebuconazole demonstrated
neurotoxicity in the acute neurotoxicity
study in rats; the LOAEL of 100 mg/kg/
day was based on increased motor
activity in male and female rats and
decreased footsplay in female rats.
Malformations indicative of nervous
system development disruption were
seen in developmental toxicity studies
in mice, rats, and rabbits. Neurotoxicity
was also seen in offspring in the
developmental neurotoxicity study in
rats. The LOAEL of 8.8 mg/kg/day was
based on decreases in body weights,
decreases in absolute brain weights,
changes in brain morphometric
parameters, and decreases in motor
activity. A NOAEL could not be
established. However, the LOAEL (8.8
mg/kg/day) was employed as the point
of departure in assessing the risk for all
exposure scenarios, and the FQPA SF is
retained as a UFL (i.e., use of a LOAEL
to extrapolate a NOAEL). A Benchmark
Dose (BMD) analysis of the datasets
relevant to the adverse offspring effects
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
68746
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 221 / Friday, November 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
(decreased body weight and brain
weight) seen at the LOAEL in the DNT
study was conducted. All of the BMDLs
(benchmark dose limit) modeled
successfully on statistically significant
effects are 1–2X lower than the LOAEL.
The results also indicate that an
extrapolated NOAEL is not likely to be
10X lower than the LOAEL and that use
of an UFL of 3X would not
underestimate risk. Therefore, the
analysis supports reducing the UFL from
10X to 3X. Using an UFL of 3X in risk
assessment (8.8 mg/kg/day ÷ 3x = 2.9
mg/kg/day) is further supported by
other studies in the tebuconazole
toxicity database: Those studies with
the lowest NOAELs were a
developmental toxicity study in mice at
3 mg/kg/day and a chronic toxicity
study in dogs at 2.9 mg/kg/day, with
effects being seen at respective LOAELs
of 10 and 4.5 mg/kg/day.
iii. Although there is qualitative
evidence of increased susceptibility in
the prenatal developmental studies in
rats, the Agency did not identify any
residual uncertainties after establishing
toxicity endpoints and traditional UFs
to be used in the risk assessment of
tebuconazole. The degree of concern for
residual uncertainties for prenatal and/
or postnatal toxicity is low.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
EPA utilized a tiered approach in
estimating exposure to tebuconazole.
While some refinements were
incorporated into dietary and residential
exposure calculations, EPA is confident
that the aggregate risk from exposure to
tebuconazole in food, water and
residential pathways will not be
underestimated. The acute and chronic
dietary exposure assessments
incorporated refined estimates of
residues in food commodities from
reliable field trial data reflecting
maximum use conditions, recent
monitoring data from USDA’s Pesticide
Data Program (PDP), and relevant
market survey data on the percentage of
crops treated. Estimated concentrations
of tebuconazole in drinking water were
incorporated into the chronic dietary
analysis as the upper bound point
estimate and into the probabilistic acute
dietary analysis as a distribution. For
the residential exposure pathway
(ornamentals, golf course turf, and
treated wood products), potential
exposure resulting from tebuconazole
outdoor uses in the residential setting
was assessed using screening-level
inputs that assumes an adult or child
will come in contact with turf and other
surfaces immediately after application.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:51 Nov 14, 2013
Jkt 232001
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. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to
tebuconazole will occupy 55% of the
aPAD for children 12 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to tebuconazole
from food and water will utilize 14% 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 tebuconazole is not
expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
Tebuconazole 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 tebuconazole.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined chronic food, water, and
short-term residential exposures result
in aggregate MOEs of 1,500 for adult
handlers; 400 for children 11–16 years
old (post-application); 360 for children
6–11 years old (post-application); 310
for adults (post-application); and 330 for
children 3–5 years old (postapplication). Because EPA’s level of
concern for tebuconazole is a MOE of
300 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
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect
was identified; however, tebuconazole
is not registered for any use patterns
that would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on intermediateterm residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure
and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for
tebuconazole.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Tebuconazole has been
classified as a possible human
carcinogen based on statistically
significant increase in the incidence of
hepatocellular adenoma, carcinoma, and
combined adenoma/carcinomas in both
sexes of NMRI mice. The Agency has
determined that the chronic risk
assessment is considered to be
protective of any cancer effects;
therefore, a separate quantitative cancer
risk assessment is not required
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 tebuconazole
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(Gas Chromatography/Nitrogen
Phosphorus Detector (GC/NPD)) is
available to enforce the tolerance
expression.
The method may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;
telephone number: (410) 305–2905;
email address: residuemethods@
epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 221 / Friday, November 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 MRLs have been established
for residues of tebuconazole in or on
barley grain at 2 ppm. The Codex MRLs
are based on field trials conducted in
Europe with a maximum of two foliar
applications and a pre-harvest interval
(PHI) of 28 days. The U.S. tolerance of
0.3 ppm for barley grain is based on
field trials conducted in the U.S. and
Canada on barley as a single application
with a 30-day PHI. The U.S. use pattern
has a total seasonal application rate
25% of that of Europe. This explains the
large difference in the recommended
U.S. tolerance and the Codex MRL, and
thus, harmonization is not possible.
Codex MRLs are established on
cucumber (0.15 ppm), summer squash
(0.2 ppm), and melons (except
watermelon) (0.15 ppm), which are
crops included in EPA crop group
vegetable, cucurbit, group 9. The Codex
MRLs are based on field trials
conducted in Europe with a maximum
of four foliar applications and a PHI of
3 days for cucumbers and squash and 7
days for melon. The U.S. tolerance for
vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 is based on
field trials conducted in the U.S. on
cucumber, summer squash, and melons
where tebuconazole was applied three
times with a 2–8 day PHI. A tolerance
of 0.4 ppm is recommended for cucurbit
vegetables using the OECD statistical
calculation procedures. Harmonization
cannot be achieved since Codex MRLs
are established on individual crops
rather than on crop groups and have
lower MRLs.
Codex MRLs are established for sweet
peppers (1 ppm), and tomatoes (0.7
ppm), which are crops included in
EPA’s crop grouping of vegetable,
fruiting, group 8–10. The Codex MRLs
are based on field trials conducted in
Europe with a maximum of three foliar
applications and a PHI of 3–7 days. The
U.S. tolerance (1.3 ppm) was based on
field trials conducted in the U.S. on bell
peppers, non-bell peppers, and tomatoes
where tebuconazole was applied as six
broadcast foliar applications with a 6–
7 day PHI. Harmonization cannot be
achieved since Codex MRLs are
established on individual crops rather
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:51 Nov 14, 2013
Jkt 232001
than on crop groups and have lower
MRLs.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established
for residues of tebuconazole, alpha-[2(4-chlorophenyl)ethyl]-alpha-(1,1dimethylethyl)-1H-1,2,4-triazole-1ethanol, including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the vegetable,
fruiting group 8–10 at 1.3 ppm. The
existing tolerance for barley, grain is
modified from 0.15 ppm to 0.3 ppm;
and the existing tolerance for vegetable,
cucurbit group 9 is modified from 0.09
ppm to 0.4 ppm. Also, due to the
establishment of the crop group
tolerance for the vegetable, fruiting,
group 8–10, the existing tolerances on
okra and the vegetable, fruiting, group 8
are removed as unnecessary.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
68747
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: October 30, 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 § 180.474, the table in paragraph
(a) is amended by:
■ a. Revising the entries for ‘‘Barley,
grain’’, and ‘‘Vegetable, cucurbit, group
9.’’
■ b. Removing the entries for ‘‘Okra’’
and ‘‘Vegetable, fruiting, group 8.’’
■
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
68748
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 221 / Friday, November 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
■ c. Adding alphabetically the
commodity ‘‘Vegetable, fruiting, group
8–10.’’
The amendments read as follows:
§ 180.474 Tebuconazole; tolerances for
residues.
The effective date of this final
rule is December 16, 2013.
Petitions for reconsideration must be
received not later than December 30,
2013.
DATES:
(a) * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
makes clarifying changes to the manner
in which designated seating positions
are measured. We are also including
technical corrections addressing sidefacing seats and longer seating surfaces.
Petitions must be submitted
to: Administrator, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
20590.
ADDRESSES:
*
*
*
*
*
Barley, grain .............................
*
*
*
0.3
*
*
Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 ....
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.4
1.3
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–27147 Filed 11–14–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
For
non-legal issues, you may contact Louis
Molino of the NHTSA Office of
Crashworthiness Standards by
telephone at (202) 366–1740, and by fax
at (202) 493–2739.
For legal issues, you may contact
David Jasinski of the NHTSA Office of
Chief Counsel by telephone at (202)
366–2992, and by fax at (202) 366–3820.
You may send mail to both of these
officials at the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
49 CFR Part 571
Table of Contents
[Docket No. NHTSA–2009–0189]
I. Background
II. Petitions for Reconsideration
III. Analysis of Petitions for Reconsideration
A. Definition of DSP
B. Analysis of Safety Problem
C. Seating Surface Measuring Procedure
1. Determination of the ‘‘Front Leading
Surface’’
2. Determination of Seating Surface Width
3. Interior Trim at the Seating Surface
Outer Edges
4. Seating Surface Interrupted by Interior
Trim
5. Voids and Seat Separation
6. H-Point Interruptions
7. Folding, Removable, and Adjustable
Seats
8. Closely Adjoining Seat Belt Buckles
D. Calculating the Number of DSPs
E. Consumer Information Label
F. SAE J1100
G. Technical Correction for Side-Facing
Seats
IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
RIN 2127–AL13
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Designated Seating
Positions
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Final rule; response to petitions
for reconsideration.
AGENCY:
This document completes the
agency’s response to petitions for
reconsideration of an October 2008 final
rule that amended the definition of the
term, ‘‘designated seating position,’’ as
used in the Federal motor vehicle safety
standards, to facilitate the determination
of which areas within the interior of a
vehicle meet that definition. The final
rule made the new definition applicable
to vehicles manufactured on and after
September 1, 2010. Previously, the
agency granted petitions requesting one
year of additional lead time until the
new definition became applicable,
removal the portion of the regulatory
text stating that State tort law
requirements are preempted, and
technical corrections. This final rule
addresses the remaining issues raised in
the petitions for reconsideration and
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:51 Nov 14, 2013
Jkt 232001
I. Background
On October 8, 2008, NHTSA
published in the Federal Register a final
rule (October 2008 final rule) revising
the definition of ‘‘designated seating
position’’ (DSP), as that term is used in
the Federal motor vehicle safety
standards (FMVSS), and providing a
calculation procedure for determining
the number of seating positions at a seat
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
location.1 The revised definition
specifies more clearly the areas within
the interior of a vehicle that are
regarded as being designated seating
positions for trucks, multipurpose
passenger vehicles, passenger cars, and
buses. The rule also established a
calculation procedure for determining
the number of DSPs at a seat location for
trucks and multipurpose passenger
vehicles with a gross vehicle weight
rating less than 4,536 kilograms (10,000
pounds), passenger cars, and buses.
The designation of a seating position
has important safety consequences.
Under the FMVSSs, motor vehicle
manufacturers must meet various
performance requirements for each
interior location designated as a seating
position. For example, FMVSS No. 208,
Occupant Crash Protection, requires
that each DSP in a light vehicle be
provided with the appropriate occupant
crash protection system (e.g., air bag,
seat belts or both). Clarity in the
definition of DSP is important for the
purposes of that standard because if a
vehicle has fewer DSPs than the number
of individuals able to sit in it, one or
more of those individuals would not be
protected by seat belts and/or other
crash protection systems.
In the October 2008 final rule, the
agency stated that the revised definition
of ‘‘designated seating position’’ added
clarity to the existing definition and was
not expected to have a substantial
impact on current vehicle designs. The
degree to which seat designs exhibited
the characteristics that gave rise to the
agency’s concerns had significantly
lessened in the fleet. Manufacturers had
either reduced the width of the seating
area to more accurately reflect the
intended occupancy or had provided
additional DSPs.
The October 2008 final rule noted that
the inclusion of auxiliary seats in the
definition of ‘‘designated seating
position’’ and the newly established
procedure for determining the number
of DSPs would require minor redesign
of a small number of vehicles. To allow
manufacturers the opportunity to make
such redesigns, the agency provided
approximately two years of lead time,
such that, on September 1, 2010, all
vehicles would need to comply with the
new requirements.
II. Petitions for Reconsideration
We received ten petitions for
reconsideration of the October 2008
final rule. The petitioners are SAE
International (SAE), BMW North
America (BMW), the Alliance of
1 73 FR 58887 (Oct. 8, 2008) (Docket No. NHTSA–
2008–0059).
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 221 (Friday, November 15, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68741-68748]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27147]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0427; FRL-9392-1]
Tebuconazole; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
tebuconazole in or on the fruiting vegetable group 8-10 and amends the
existing tolerances for barley grain and the cucurbit vegetable group
9. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested this
tolerance and amendment under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective November 15, 2013. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before January 14, 2014,
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-2012-0427, 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: 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 eCFR 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-2012-0427 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
January 14, 2014. 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-2012-0427, 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 August 22, 2012 (77 FR 50661) (FRL-9358-
9), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
2E8012) by Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College
Road East, Suite 201W., Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested
that 40 CFR 180.474 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues
of the fungicide tebuconazole, alpha-[2-(4-chlorophenyl)ethyl]-alpha-
(1,1-dimethylethyl)-1H-1,2,4-triazole-1-ethanol, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on barley, grain at 0.3 parts per
million (ppm); vegetable, cucurbit group 9 at 0.4 ppm; and vegetable,
fruiting group 8-10 at 1.3 ppm. The petition also requested the removal
of the established tolerance, in or on vegetable, fruiting, group 8 at
1.3 ppm once the proposed tolerance for vegetable, fruiting group 8-10
at 1.3 ppm, has been established since the proposed new tolerance will
supersede the existing tolerance. That document referenced a summary of
the petition prepared by Bayer CropScience, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
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
[[Page 68742]]
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 tebuconazole including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with tebuconazole 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.
Tebuconazole has low acute toxicity by the oral and dermal routes
of exposure and moderate toxicity by the inhalation route. It is not a
dermal sensitizer nor a dermal irritant; however, it is slightly to
mildly irritating to the eye. The primary target organs of tebuconazole
toxicity are the liver, the adrenals, the hematopoietic system, and the
nervous system. Effects on these target organs were seen in both rodent
and non-rodent species. In addition, ocular lesions were seen in dogs
(including lenticular degeneration and increased cataract formation)
following subchronic or chronic exposure.
Oral administration of tebuconazole caused developmental toxicity
in all species evaluated (rat, rabbit and mouse), with the most
prominent effects in the nervous system. The developmental toxicity
studies, including the developmental neurotoxicity study, demonstrated
an increase in susceptibility in developing fetuses both quantitatively
and qualitatively.
Tebuconazole was classified as a Group C possible human carcinogen,
based on an increase in the incidence of hepatocellular adenomas,
carcinomas, and combined adenomas/carcinomas in male and female mice.
This classification is generally used for chemicals with limited
evidence of carcinogenicity in animals in the absence of human data.
EPA has determined that quantification of risk using a non-linear
approach, i.e., reference dose (RfD), for tebuconazole will adequately
account for all chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity, that could
result from exposure to tebuconazole. That conclusion is based on the
following considerations: (1) No carcinogenic response was seen in
either sex in an acceptable rat cancer study; (2) the tumors found in
the mouse are commonly seen in the mouse; (3) both tumors types were
found only at the high dose, which was considered to be excessive for
carcinogenicity testing based on the non-neoplastic findings; and (4)
tebuconazole is not mutagenic.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by tebuconazole 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 docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0427 on pages
33-36 of the document titled ``Tebuconazole: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Tolerance Increases Based on Submission of Condition of
Registration Requirements for Barley and Cantaloupe; and Crop Group
Expansion for Fruiting Vegetable Crop Group 8-10.''
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 tebuconazole used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Tebuconazole 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 LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/ Acute RfD = 0.029 Developmental Neurotoxicity Study--Rat.
population including infants day. mg/kg/day. LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day based on decreases
and children). UFA = 10x......... aPAD = 0.029 mg/ in body weights, absolute brain weights,
UFH = 10x......... kg/day. brain measurements and motor activity in
FQPA SF (UFL) = 3x offspring.
Chronic dietary (All LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/ Chronic RfD = Developmental Neurotoxicity Study--Rat.
populations). day. 0.029 mg/kg/day. LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day based on decreases
UFA = 10x......... cPAD = 0.029 mg/ in body weights, absolute brain weights,
UFH = 10x......... kg/day. brain measurements and motor activity in
FQPA SF (UFL) = 3x offspring.
Incidental oral short-term (1 LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/ LOC for MOE = 300 Developmental Neurotoxicity Study--Rat.
to 30 days). day. LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day based on decreases
UFA = 10x......... in body weights, absolute brain weights,
UFH = 10x......... brain measurements and motor activity in
FQPA SF (UFL) = 3x offspring.
[[Page 68743]]
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 Oral study LOAEL = LOC for MOE = 300 Developmental Neurotoxicity Study--Rat.
days). 8.8mg/kg/day LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day based on decreases
(dermal in body weights, absolute brain weights,
absorption rate = brain measurements and motor activity in
13%. offspring.
UFA = 10x.........
UFH = 10x.........
FQPA SF (UFL ) =
3x.
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 Oral study LOAEL = LOC for MOE = 300 Developmental Neurotoxicity Study--Rat.
days). 8.8 mg/kg/day. LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day based on decreases
UFA = 10x......... in body weights, absolute brain weights,
UFH = 10x......... brain measurements and motor activity in
FQPA SF (UFL) = 3x offspring.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, Classification: Group C- possible human carcinogen based on statistically
inhalation). significant increase in the incidence of hepatocellular adenoma, carcinoma, and
combined adenoma/carcinomas in both sexes of NMRI mice. The chronic risk
assessment is considered to be protective of any cancer effects; therefore, a
separate quantitative cancer risk assessment is not required.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to tebuconazole, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing tebuconzole tolerances in 40 CFR
180.474. EPA assessed dietary exposures from tebuconazole 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.
Such effects were identified for tebuconazole. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2003-2008 National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA).
As to residue levels in food, a somewhat refined, acute probabilistic
dietary exposure assessment was conducted for all existing food uses of
tebuconazole. EPA assumed tolerance levels residues for some
commodities and used field trial and USDA PDP data for others. EPA also
assumed 100% crop treated levels for most commodities and used percent
crop treated (PCT) data for other commodities as described in Unit
III.C.1.iv. below.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, EPA used the food consumption data from the 2003-2008
NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, a somewhat refined chronic
dietary exposure assessment was conducted for all existing food uses of
tebuconazole. EPA assumed tolerance levels residues for some
commodities and used field trial and USDA PDP data for others. EPA also
assumed 100% crop treated levels for most commodities and used PCT data
for other commodities as described in Unit III.C.1.iv. below.
iii. Cancer. The Agency determined that cancer dietary risk
concerns due to long-term consumption of tebuconazole residues are
adequately addressed by the chronic dietary exposure analysis using the
reference dose; i.e., the chronic dietary risk assessment is considered
to be protective of any cancer effects, and therefore, a separate
cancer dietary exposure analysis was not performed.
iv. Anticipated residue and 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.
For the acute assessment, the Agency estimated the PCT for existing
uses as follows:
Grapes: 25%; grape, raisin: 25%; nectarine: 25%; peach: 20%;
peanuts: 45%.
For the chronic assessment, the Agency estimated the PCT for
existing uses as follows:
Grapes: 15%; grape, raisin: 15%; nectarine: 20%; peach: 15%;
peanuts: 35%.
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
[[Page 68744]]
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 1. 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 also used 2006 PCT information for tebuconazole on the
following uses for the acute dietary assessment (apples, 44%; apricots
56%; cherries, (babyfood), 42%; cherries (all other food forms), 100%;
corn, sweet, 22%; hops 64%; plum 26%; turnip 68%) and for the chronic
dietary assessment (apples, 41%; apricots, 43%; cherries, (babyfood),
37%; cherries (all other food forms), 66%; corn, sweet, 14%; hops, 64%;
plum, 24%; turnip, 44%). For further explanation of EPA's process for
developing these PCT estimates, see the 2011 final rule for
tebuconazole tolerances (76 FR 54127) (August 31, 2011) and its
supporting documents.
Subsequently, EPA considered the maximum and average PCT estimates
for tebuconazole from the most recent (2011) screening level usage
analysis available. Based on that information, EPA concludes that its
risk assessments do not underestimate the overall actual PCT for uses
of tebuconazole or exposure from the use of tebuconazole.
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 tebuconazole may be applied in a particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for tebuconazole in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of tebuconazole. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
tebuconazole for acute exposures are estimated to be 96.6 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and 1.56 ppb for ground water and for
chronic exposures are estimated to be 59 ppb for surface water and 1.56
ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For the acute dietary risk
assessment a distribution of 30-year daily surface water concentrations
was estimated for the EDWCs of tebuconazole. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 59 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).
Tebuconazole is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: Turf, flower gardens, trees,
ornamentals, and pressure-treated wood. EPA assessed residential
exposure using the following assumptions: For residential handlers,
exposure is expected to be short-term. Intermediate-term exposures are
not likely because of the intermittent nature of applications by
homeowners. Dermal and inhalation exposures were combined since the
same endpoint and point of departure (POD) is used for both routes of
exposure. Residential dermal and incidental oral post-application
exposure was assessed for adults and children golfing, working in
gardens, and performing physical activities on pressure-treated wood
after application of tebuconazole may receive exposure to tebuconazole
residues. Post-application exposure is expected to be short-term in
duration. 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.''
Tebuconazole is a member of the triazole-containing class of
pesticides, the conazoles. Although conazoles act similarly in plants
by inhibiting ergosterol biosynthesis, there is not necessarily a
relationship between their pesticidal activity and their mechanism of
toxicity in mammals. Structural similarities do not constitute a common
mechanism of toxicity. Evidence is needed to establish that the
chemicals operate by the same, or essentially the same, sequence of
major biochemical events. In conazoles, however, a variable pattern of
toxicological responses is found; some are hepatotoxic and
hepatocarcinogenic in mice. Some induce thyroid tumors in rats. Some
induce developmental, reproductive, and neurological effects in
rodents. Furthermore, the conazoles produce a diverse range of
biochemical events, including altered cholesterol levels, stress
responses, and altered DNA methylation. It is not clearly understood
whether these biochemical events are directly connected to their
toxicological outcomes. Thus, there is currently no conclusive data to
indicate that conazoles share common mechanisms of toxicity and EPA is
not following a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of
toxicity for the conazoles. For information regarding EPA's procedures
for cumulating effects from substances found to have a common mechanism
of toxicity, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
Tebuconazole is a triazole-derived pesticide. This class of
compounds can form the common metabolite 1,2,4-triazole and two
triazole conjugates (triazolylalanine and triazolylacetic acid). To
support existing tolerances and to establish new tolerances for
[[Page 68745]]
triazole-derivative pesticides, including tebuconazole, EPA conducted a
human health risk assessment for exposure to 1,2,4-triazole,
triazolylalanine, and triazolylacetic acid resulting from the use of
all current and pending uses of any triazole-derived fungicide. The
risk assessment is a highly conservative, screening-level evaluation in
terms of hazards associated with common metabolites (e.g., use of a
maximum combination of uncertainty factors) and potential dietary and
non-dietary exposures (i.e., high end estimates of both dietary and
non-dietary exposures). In addition, the Agency retained the additional
10X FQPA safety factor for the protection of infants and children. The
assessment includes evaluations of risks for various subgroups,
including those comprised of infants and children. The Agency's
complete risk assessment is found in the propiconazole reregistration
docket at https://www.regulations.gov, docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-
0497.
An updated dietary exposure and risk analysis for the common
triazole metabolites 1,2,4-triazole (T), triazolylalanine (TA),
triazolylacetic acid (TAA), and triazolylpyruvic acid (TP) was
conducted and completed in May 2013, in association with a registration
request for several other triazole fungicides. That analysis concluded
that risk estimates were below the Agency's level of concern for all
population groups. After addition of tolerances associated with this
action to the exposure analyses, the increased tolerances for
tebuconazole in/on barley, grain and vegetables, cucurbits, group 9
along with the crop group conversion covered by this action do not
significantly https://www.regulations.gov by searching for the following
titles and docket numbers: ``Common Triazole Metabolites: Updated
Aggregate Human Health Risk Assessment to Address The New Section 3
Registrations For Use of Prothioconazole on Bushberry Crop Subgroup 13-
07B, Low Growing Berry, Except Strawberry, Crop Subgroup 13-07H, and
Cucurbit Vegetables Crop Group 9; Use of Flutriafol on Coffee; and
Ipconazole on Crop Group 6'' (located in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2012-0876); ``Common Triazole Metabolites: Updated Dietary (Food +
Water) Exposure and Risk Assessment to Address the Revised Tolerance
for Residues of Fenbuconazole in Peppers'' (docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2012-0520).
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 toxicity database for
tebuconazole includes prenatal developmental toxicity studies in three
species (mouse, rat, and rabbit), a reproductive toxicity study in
rats, acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies in rats, and a
developmental neurotoxicity study in rats. The data from prenatal
developmental toxicity studies in mice and a developmental
neurotoxicity study in rats indicated an increased quantitative and
qualitative susceptibility following in utero exposure to tebuconazole.
The NOAELs/LOAELs for developmental toxicity in these studies were
found at dose levels less than those that induce maternal toxicity or
in the presence of slight maternal toxicity. There was no indication of
increased quantitative susceptibility in the rat and rabbit
developmental toxicity studies, the NOAELs for developmental toxicity
were comparable to or higher than the NOAELs for maternal toxicity. In
all three species, however, there was indication of increased
qualitative susceptibility. For most studies, minimal maternal toxicity
was seen at the LOAEL (consisting of increases in hematological
findings in mice, increased liver weights in rabbits and rats, and
decreased body weight gain/food consumption in rats) and did not
increase substantially in severity at higher doses. However, there was
more concern for the developmental effects at each LOAEL, which
included increases in runts, increased fetal loss, and malformations in
mice; increased skeletal variations in rats; and increased fetal loss
and frank malformations in rabbits. Additionally, more severe
developmental effects (including frank malformations) were seen at
higher doses in mice, rats and rabbits. In the developmental
neurotoxicity study, maternal toxicity was seen only at the high dose
(decreased body weights, body weight gains, and food consumption,
prolonged gestation with mortality, and increased number of dead
fetuses), while offspring toxicity (including decreases in body weight,
brain weight, brain measurements and functional activities) was seen at
all doses.
Available data indicated greater sensitivity of the developing
organism to exposure to tebuconazole, as demonstrated by increases in
qualitative sensitivity in prenatal developmental toxicity studies in
rats, mice, and rabbits, and by increases in both qualitative and
quantitative sensitivity in the developmental neurotoxicity study in
rats with tebuconazole. However, the degree of concern is low because
the toxic endpoints in the prenatal developmental toxicity studies were
well characterized with clear NOAELs established and the most sensitive
endpoint, which is found in the developmental neurotoxicity study, has
been used for overall risk assessments. Therefore, there are no
residual uncertainties for prenatal and/or postnatal susceptibility.
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 3x. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for tebuconazole is considered complete.
An immunotoxicity study in rats has been submitted to the Agency and
the study is currently under review. With preliminary evaluation,
tebuconazole tested up to 1,000 ppm (78.4 milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/
kg/day) produced no immunotoxicity under the conditions of this study.
ii. Tebuconazole demonstrated neurotoxicity in the acute
neurotoxicity study in rats; the LOAEL of 100 mg/kg/day was based on
increased motor activity in male and female rats and decreased
footsplay in female rats. Malformations indicative of nervous system
development disruption were seen in developmental toxicity studies in
mice, rats, and rabbits. Neurotoxicity was also seen in offspring in
the developmental neurotoxicity study in rats. The LOAEL of 8.8 mg/kg/
day was based on decreases in body weights, decreases in absolute brain
weights, changes in brain morphometric parameters, and decreases in
motor activity. A NOAEL could not be established. However, the LOAEL
(8.8 mg/kg/day) was employed as the point of departure in assessing the
risk for all exposure scenarios, and the FQPA SF is retained as a
UFL (i.e., use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL). A
Benchmark Dose (BMD) analysis of the datasets relevant to the adverse
offspring effects
[[Page 68746]]
(decreased body weight and brain weight) seen at the LOAEL in the DNT
study was conducted. All of the BMDLs (benchmark dose limit) modeled
successfully on statistically significant effects are 1-2X lower than
the LOAEL. The results also indicate that an extrapolated NOAEL is not
likely to be 10X lower than the LOAEL and that use of an UFL
of 3X would not underestimate risk. Therefore, the analysis supports
reducing the UFL from 10X to 3X. Using an UFL of
3X in risk assessment (8.8 mg/kg/day / 3x = 2.9 mg/kg/day) is further
supported by other studies in the tebuconazole toxicity database: Those
studies with the lowest NOAELs were a developmental toxicity study in
mice at 3 mg/kg/day and a chronic toxicity study in dogs at 2.9 mg/kg/
day, with effects being seen at respective LOAELs of 10 and 4.5 mg/kg/
day.
iii. Although there is qualitative evidence of increased
susceptibility in the prenatal developmental studies in rats, the
Agency did not identify any residual uncertainties after establishing
toxicity endpoints and traditional UFs to be used in the risk
assessment of tebuconazole. The degree of concern for residual
uncertainties for prenatal and/or postnatal toxicity is low.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. EPA utilized a tiered approach in estimating exposure to
tebuconazole. While some refinements were incorporated into dietary and
residential exposure calculations, EPA is confident that the aggregate
risk from exposure to tebuconazole in food, water and residential
pathways will not be underestimated. The acute and chronic dietary
exposure assessments incorporated refined estimates of residues in food
commodities from reliable field trial data reflecting maximum use
conditions, recent monitoring data from USDA's Pesticide Data Program
(PDP), and relevant market survey data on the percentage of crops
treated. Estimated concentrations of tebuconazole in drinking water
were incorporated into the chronic dietary analysis as the upper bound
point estimate and into the probabilistic acute dietary analysis as a
distribution. For the residential exposure pathway (ornamentals, golf
course turf, and treated wood products), potential exposure resulting
from tebuconazole outdoor uses in the residential setting was assessed
using screening-level inputs that assumes an adult or child will come
in contact with turf and other surfaces immediately after application.
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. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to tebuconazole will occupy 55% of the aPAD for children 12 years old,
the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
tebuconazole from food and water will utilize 14% 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
tebuconazole is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
Tebuconazole 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 tebuconazole.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined chronic food, water, and
short-term residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 1,500 for
adult handlers; 400 for children 11-16 years old (post-application);
360 for children 6-11 years old (post-application); 310 for adults
(post-application); and 330 for children 3-5 years old (post-
application). Because EPA's level of concern for tebuconazole is a MOE
of 300 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
tebuconazole is not registered for any use patterns that would result
in intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for
tebuconazole.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Tebuconazole has been
classified as a possible human carcinogen based on statistically
significant increase in the incidence of hepatocellular adenoma,
carcinoma, and combined adenoma/carcinomas in both sexes of NMRI mice.
The Agency has determined that the chronic risk assessment is
considered to be protective of any cancer effects; therefore, a
separate quantitative cancer risk assessment is not required
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 tebuconazole residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (Gas Chromatography/Nitrogen
Phosphorus Detector (GC/NPD)) is available to enforce the tolerance
expression.
The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4).
[[Page 68747]]
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 MRLs have been established for residues of tebuconazole in or
on barley grain at 2 ppm. The Codex MRLs are based on field trials
conducted in Europe with a maximum of two foliar applications and a
pre-harvest interval (PHI) of 28 days. The U.S. tolerance of 0.3 ppm
for barley grain is based on field trials conducted in the U.S. and
Canada on barley as a single application with a 30-day PHI. The U.S.
use pattern has a total seasonal application rate 25% of that of
Europe. This explains the large difference in the recommended U.S.
tolerance and the Codex MRL, and thus, harmonization is not possible.
Codex MRLs are established on cucumber (0.15 ppm), summer squash
(0.2 ppm), and melons (except watermelon) (0.15 ppm), which are crops
included in EPA crop group vegetable, cucurbit, group 9. The Codex MRLs
are based on field trials conducted in Europe with a maximum of four
foliar applications and a PHI of 3 days for cucumbers and squash and 7
days for melon. The U.S. tolerance for vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 is
based on field trials conducted in the U.S. on cucumber, summer squash,
and melons where tebuconazole was applied three times with a 2-8 day
PHI. A tolerance of 0.4 ppm is recommended for cucurbit vegetables
using the OECD statistical calculation procedures. Harmonization cannot
be achieved since Codex MRLs are established on individual crops rather
than on crop groups and have lower MRLs.
Codex MRLs are established for sweet peppers (1 ppm), and tomatoes
(0.7 ppm), which are crops included in EPA's crop grouping of
vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10. The Codex MRLs are based on field
trials conducted in Europe with a maximum of three foliar applications
and a PHI of 3-7 days. The U.S. tolerance (1.3 ppm) was based on field
trials conducted in the U.S. on bell peppers, non-bell peppers, and
tomatoes where tebuconazole was applied as six broadcast foliar
applications with a 6-7 day PHI. Harmonization cannot be achieved since
Codex MRLs are established on individual crops rather than on crop
groups and have lower MRLs.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established for residues of tebuconazole,
alpha-[2-(4-chlorophenyl)ethyl]-alpha-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-1H-1,2,4-
triazole-1-ethanol, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on
the vegetable, fruiting group 8-10 at 1.3 ppm. The existing tolerance
for barley, grain is modified from 0.15 ppm to 0.3 ppm; and the
existing tolerance for vegetable, cucurbit group 9 is modified from
0.09 ppm to 0.4 ppm. Also, due to the establishment of the crop group
tolerance for the vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10, the existing
tolerances on okra and the vegetable, fruiting, group 8 are removed as
unnecessary.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d)
in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has
been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule
is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain
any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 30, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. In Sec. 180.474, the table in paragraph (a) is amended by:
0
a. Revising the entries for ``Barley, grain'', and ``Vegetable,
cucurbit, group 9.''
0
b. Removing the entries for ``Okra'' and ``Vegetable, fruiting, group
8.''
[[Page 68748]]
0
c. Adding alphabetically the commodity ``Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-
10.''
The amendments read as follows:
Sec. 180.474 Tebuconazole; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Barley, grain.............................................. 0.3
* * * * *
Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9............................... 0.4
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10............................ 1.3
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-27147 Filed 11-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P