Mandipropamid; Pesticide Tolerances, 76987-76992 [2013-30348]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 245 / Friday, December 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Royalty Board
37 CFR Part 385
[Docket No. 2011–3 CRB Phonorecords II]
Adjustment of Determination of
Compulsory License Rates for
Mechanical and Digital Phonorecords
Copyright Royalty Board,
Library of Congress.
ACTION: Final rule; technical
amendment.
AGENCY:
The Copyright Royalty Judges
are making a technical amendment to
the regulations regarding the rates and
terms for the section 115 statutory
license for the use of musical works in
physical phonorecord deliveries,
permanent digital downloads, ringtones,
interactive streaming, limited
downloads, limited offerings, mixed
service bundles, music bundles, paid
locker services, and purchased content
locker services. The technical
amendment corrects a clerical error
regarding an accounting provision in the
final rule.
DATES: Effective: January 1, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard Strasser, Senior Attorney, or
Gina Giuffreda, Attorney Advisor.
Telephone: (202) 707–7658 or email at
crb@loc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
November 13, 2013, the Copyright
Royalty Judges (Judges) published in the
Federal Register final regulations
setting the rates and terms for the
section 115 statutory license for the use
of musical works in physical
phonorecord deliveries, permanent
digital downloads, ringtones, interactive
streaming, limited downloads, limited
offerings, mixed service bundles, music
bundles, paid locker services, and
purchased content locker services. 78
FR 67938. In the preamble to the final
rule, the Judges stated that they could
not adopt an accounting provision
proposed in § 385.12(e) 1 because of a
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
1 The Judges proposed two accounting
provisions—§ 385.12(e) and § 385.22(d)—each of
which would have required the licensee’s statement
of account to ‘‘set forth each step of its calculations
with sufficient information to allow the copyright
owner to assess the accuracy and manner in which
the licensee determined the payable royalty pool
and per-play allocations (including information
sufficient to demonstrate whether and how a
minimum royalty or subscriber-based royalty floor
pursuant to § 385.13 does or does not apply) and,
for each offering reported, also indicate the type of
licensed activity involved and the number of plays
of each musical work (including an indication of
any overtime adjustment applied) that is the basis
of the per-work royalty allocation being paid.’’ 77
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:53 Dec 19, 2013
Jkt 232001
finding by the Register of Copyrights
(Register) that adoption by the Judges of
such a provision ‘‘represent[ed] an
encroachment on the Register’s
[exclusive] authority regarding
statements of account’’ kept under the
section 115 statutory license. See Id. at
67940, citing 78 FR 28772 (May 16,
2013). Due to an inadvertent oversight,
however, no instruction reflecting the
removal of § 385.12(e) appeared in the
regulatory text.2 The Judges now correct
this error.
Section 803(c)(4) of the Copyright Act
authorizes the Judges to issue ‘‘an
amendment to a written determination
to correct any technical or clerical errors
in the determination’’ and directs that
such amendment ‘‘be set forth in a
written addendum to the determination
that shall be distributed to the
participants and shall be published in
the Federal Register.’’ 17 U.S.C.
803(c)(4).3 The Judges make this
correction by today’s notice pursuant to
their continuing jurisdiction under
section 803(c)(4) of the Copyright Act.
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 385
Copyright, Phonorecords, Recordings.
Final Regulations
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Copyright Royalty Judges
amend Part 385 of Chapter III of title 37
of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 385—RATES AND TERMS FOR
USE OF MUSICAL WORKS UNDER
COMPULSORY LICENSE FOR MAKING
AND DISTRIBUTING OF PHYSICAL
AND DIGITAL PHONORECORDS
1. The authority citation for part 385
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 115, 801(b)(1),
804(b)(4).
§ 385.12
[Amended]
2. Section 385.12 is amended by
removing paragraph (e).
■
FR 29259, 29267 (May 17, 2012). The language of
proposed § 385.22(d) mirrored that in § 385.12(e),
except for non-substantive conforming language
needed for its inclusion in proposed Subpart C.
2 Today’s amendment concerns only proposed
§ 385.12(e) because this section was adopted
initially by the Judges in 2009. See 74 FR 4510 (Jan.
26, 2009). Proposed § 385.22(d) was part of a newly
proposed Subpart C, see 77 FR 29259 (May 17,
2012), and was not adopted in the final rule
published on November 13, 2013.
3 The Judges provided a copy of this technical
amendment to the participants of this proceeding
prior to its submission to the Federal Register for
publication.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76987
Dated: November 18, 2013.
Suzanne M. Barnett,
Chief Copyright Royalty Judge.
Approved by:
James H. Billington,
Librarian of Congress.
[FR Doc. 2013–30346 Filed 12–19–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–72–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0980; FRL–9903–57]
Mandipropamid; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances in or on multiple
commodities and removes several
established tolerances for residues of
mandipropamid, which are identified
and discussed later in this document.
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4) requested these tolerances under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 20, 2013. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 18, 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–2012–0980, 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.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
76988
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 245 / Friday, December 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2012–0980 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 February 18, 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–
2012–0980, by one of the following
methods:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:53 Dec 19, 2013
Jkt 232001
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of February
27, 2013 (78 FR 13295) (FRL–9380–2),
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 2E8126) by IR–4,
500 College Road East, Suite 201W.,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.637 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the fungicide
mandipropamid, 4-chloro-N-[2-[3methoxy-4-(2propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-alpha-(2propynyloxy)-benzeneacetamide, in or
on basil, dried at 200 parts per million
(ppm); basil, fresh at 30 ppm; bean,
succulent at 0.90 ppm; cowpea, forage at
15 ppm; fruit, small, vine climbing,
subgroup 13–07F, except fuzzy kiwifruit
at 2.0 ppm; ginseng at 0.3 ppm; onion,
bulb, subgroup 3–07A at 0.1 ppm;
onion, green, subgroup 3–07B at 7.0
ppm; and vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10
at 1.0 ppm. The petition additionally
requested to remove the established
tolerances in or on grape at 1.4 ppm;
onion, dry bulb at 0.05 ppm; onion,
green at 4 ppm; okra at 1.0 ppm; and
vegetable, fruiting, group 8 at 1.0 ppm,
upon establishment of the associated
proposed tolerances. That document
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared on behalf of IR–4 by Syngenta
Crop Protection, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has
determined that the proposed tolerances
should not be established on succulent
bean or cowpea forage, and that a
tolerance should be established on snap
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
bean. The Agency has also determined
that the proposed tolerances in or on
small vine climbing fruit subgroup 13–
07F, bulb onion subgroup 3–07A and
green onion subgroup 3–07B should be
revised. EPA has also revised the
commodity terminology for fresh and
dried basil and determined that the
tolerance expression should be revised
for all commodities. Finally, EPA
determined that the time-limited
tolerance on fresh basil should be
removed. The reasons for these changes
are explained in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. . . .’’
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for mandipropamid
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with mandipropamid
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.
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 245 / Friday, December 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Subchronic and chronic studies
indicate that the liver is the primary
target organ for mandipropamid. Liver
effects were identified in subchronic
studies with rats, mice, and dogs. Liver
effects included increased plasma
albumin, total protein, cholesterol, and
gamma-glutamyl transferase, as well as
periportal hypertrophy in rats; increased
liver enzymes, increased pigment in
hepatocytes and Kupffer cells, and
centrilobular hepatocyte vacuolation in
dogs; increased eosinophilia in rats and
mice; and increased liver weights in
rats, mice and dogs. In the chronic dog
study, increases in microscopic pigment
in the liver and increased liver enzymes
were observed. No liver effects were
observed in chronic rat and mouse
studies up to the highest doses tested.
Instead, nephrotoxicity was observed in
the chronic rat study and decreased
body weight and food utilization was
observed in the chronic mouse study.
The findings of liver toxicity and
nephrotoxicity are consistent with the
results from metabolism studies where
the tissues with the highest levels of
radioactivity were the liver followed by
the kidney.
No evidence of neurotoxicity was
observed in the acute or subchronic
neurotoxicity screening battery. No
systemic or dermal toxicity was
observed following dermal exposure for
28 days, up to the limit dose. No
immunotoxicity was observed up to the
highest dose tested in the mouse
immunotoxicity study.
No evidence of increased quantitative
or qualitative susceptibility was seen in
developmental toxicity studies in rats
and rabbits or in a 2-generation
reproduction study in rats. The only
effects observed in fetuses or pups were
in the 2-generation reproduction study,
where decreased pup body weight was
observed in the presence of maternal
toxicity (decreased body weight, body
weight gain, and food utilization). In
addition, there was a delay in preputial
separation in F1 males which was
considered to be the result of lower
body weights.
There was no evidence of tumors in
the carcinogenicity study in mice or in
the chronic/carcinogenicity study in rats
and there was no evidence that
mandipropamid was mutagenic or
clastogenic. Therefore, mandipropamid
is classified as ‘‘not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans.’’
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by mandipropamid as
well as the no-observed-adverse-effectlevel (NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document,
‘‘Mandipropamid: Human Health Risk
Assessment For New Uses On Basil,
Ginseng and Snap Beans, as Well as
Crop Group Expansions for Fruiting
Vegetable; Small Fruit, Vine Climbing,
Except Fuzzy Kiwifruit; and Bulb Onion
and Green Onion Subgroups.’’ at pages
33–38 in docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2012–0980.
76989
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which the NOAEL and the
LOAEL are identified. 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 mandipropamid used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR MANDIPROPAMID FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety factors
Exposure/scenario
RfD, PAD, LOC for risk
assessment
Study and toxicological effects
No endpoint attributable to a single exposure was identified.
Chronic dietary (All populations) .........
NOAEL=5 mg/kg/day ....
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) ........
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Acute dietary (General population including infants and children and females 13–49 years old).
Classified as not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.
Chronic RfD = 0.05 mg/
kg/day.
cPAD = 0.05 mg/kg/day
Chronic Toxicity Study, Dogs LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/
day based on increased incidence and severity
of microscopic pigment in the liver and increased alkaline phosphatase activity in both
sexes as well as increased alanine
aminotransferase activity in males.
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. Mg/kg/day =
milligrams/kilogram/day. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference
dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members
of the human population (intraspecies).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to mandipropamid, EPA
considered exposure under the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:53 Dec 19, 2013
Jkt 232001
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing mandipropamid tolerances in
40 CFR 180.637. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from mandipropamid in food
as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
76990
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 245 / Friday, December 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
occurring as a result of a 1-day or single
exposure. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies
for mandipropamid; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used Dietary Exposure Evaluation
Model software with the Food
Commodity Intake Database (DEEM–
FCID) Version 3.16, which uses food
consumption data from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s)
National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, ‘‘What We Eat in
America’’ (NHANES/WWEIA) from
2003 through 2008. As to residue levels
in food, EPA used tolerance-level
residues with the exception of
subgroups 13–07F, 3–07A, and 3–07B,
for which EPA used residue levels
higher than the tolerance levels being
established here; and tuberous and corm
vegetable subgroup 1C, which was
assessed at 0.026 ppm, in order to
account for the SYN 500003 metabolite
for this commodity. EPA assessed
tolerances for subgroups 13–07F, 3–
07A, and 3–07B using levels that were
proposed by the petitioner and that
were harmonized with Codex maximum
residue levels. However, for reasons
discussed in Unit IV.B., EPA is
harmonizing these tolerance levels with
the lower Canadian maximum residue
levels (MRLs). The Agency also
assumed 100 percent crop treated (PCT)
estimates for all commodities and
utilized default DEEM–FCID TM (ver.
7.81) processing factors, with the
exception of chemical-specific
processing factors for grape wine and
sherry.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that mandipropamid does
not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure
assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for mandipropamid. Tolerance level
residues and/or 100 PCT were assumed
for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for mandipropamid in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
mandipropamid. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:53 Dec 19, 2013
Jkt 232001
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir
Screening Tool (FIRST) and Pesticide
Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM
GW), the estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) of
mandipropamid for chronic exposures
for non-cancer assessments are
estimated to be 9.0 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 79 ppb for
ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration value of 79 ppb was
used to assess the contribution from
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).
Mandipropamid is not registered for any
specific use patterns that would result
in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’ EPA has not
found mandipropamid to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and
mandipropamid does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that mandipropamid does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity
with other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at http:
//www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA)
Safety Factor (SF). In applying this
provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There were no treatment-related effects
observed in dams or fetuses in the
developmental toxicity studies in rats or
rabbits up to the limit dose of 1,000
milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day).
In the rat 2-generation reproductive
study, decreased pup weight occurred
only in the presence of comparable
maternal toxicity (decreased body
weight, body weight gain, and food
utilization). Therefore, there is no
increased quantitative or qualitative
susceptibility to rat or rabbit offspring
exposed in utero and/or postnatally to
mandipropamid, and there are no
residual uncertainties with respect to
prenatal or postnatal exposure.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for
mandipropamid is complete.
ii. There is no indication that
mandipropamid is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
mandipropamid results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessment
was performed based on 100 PCT and
tolerance-level residues for all
commodities, with the exception of
tuberous and corm vegetable subgroup
1C, which was assessed for the tolerance
level plus the metabolite. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to
mandipropamid in drinking water.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by mandipropamid.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 245 / Friday, December 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account acute
exposure estimates from dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, mandipropamid is
not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to
mandipropamid from food and water
will utilize 46% of the cPAD for
children 1–2 years old, the population
group receiving the greatest exposure.
There are no residential uses for
mandipropamid.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk.
Short- and intermediate-term aggregate
exposure takes into account short- and
intermediate-term residential exposure
plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
Short- and intermediate-term adverse
effects were identified; however,
mandipropamid is not registered for any
use patterns that would result in shortor intermediate-term residential
exposures. Short- and intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on short- and
intermediate-term residential exposure
plus chronic dietary exposure. Because
there is no short- or 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 short-term risk),
no further assessment of short- and
intermediate-term risk is necessary, and
EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk
assessment for evaluating short- and
intermediate-term risk for
mandipropamid.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
mandipropamid is not expected to pose
a cancer risk to humans.
5. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:53 Dec 19, 2013
Jkt 232001
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
from aggregate exposure to
mandipropamid residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology,
a high performance liquid
chromatography with tandem mass
spectrometric detection (LC/MS/MS), is
available to enforce the tolerance
expression.
The method may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;
telephone number: (410) 305–2905;
email address: residuemethods@
epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international MRLs established by the
Codex Alimentarius Commission
(Codex), as required by FFDCA section
408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a
joint United Nations Food and
Agriculture Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
The Codex has established MRLs for
mandipropamid in or on bell and
nonbell pepper at 1 ppm, bulb onion at
0.1 ppm, grape at 2 ppm, and spring
onions at 7.0 ppm. The tolerances are
harmonized with the U.S. tolerances
established in or on fruiting vegetable
group 8–10 (including pepper) at 1.0
ppm. However, the tolerances in or on
small vine climbing fruit except fuzzy
kiwifruit subgroup 13–07F (including
grape) at 1.4 ppm, bulb onion subgroup
3–07A at 0.05 ppm, and green onion
subgroup 3–07B at 4 ppm are not
harmonized with associated Codex
MRLs on these commodities because it
has been determined that the major
export market for these commodities is
Canada. Therefore, in order to maintain
harmonization of U.S. tolerances and
Canadian MRLs for these commodities,
EPA is establishing these subgroup
tolerances at the levels that align with
the Canadian MRLs. There are no Codex
MRLs on the other commodities
associated with this action.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
76991
Based on the data supporting the
petition, EPA has revised basil, fresh to
basil, fresh leaves and basil, dried to
basil, dried leaves in order to correct the
commodity terminology. EPA also
determined that the following proposed
tolerances should be amended in order
to harmonize with Canadian MRLs on
associated commodities: Small vine
climbing fruit except fuzzy kiwifruit
subgroup 13–07F from 2.0 ppm to 1.4
ppm; bulb onion subgroup 3–07A from
0.1 ppm to 0.05 ppm; and green onion
subgroup 3–07B from 7.0 ppm to 4.0
ppm. Additionally, while EPA was
petitioned for a tolerance on succulent
bean, no field trial data were conducted
on a succulent shelled bean cultivar in
order to support the tolerance. Instead,
the petitioner submitted snap bean data,
which EPA determined is sufficient to
support a tolerance of mandipropamid
in or on bean, snap at 0.90 ppm. Snap
beans are a subset of the larger
succulent shelled bean definition, as
defined in 40 CFR 180.1(g).
Additionally, the Agency determined
that the proposed tolerance in or on
cowpea, forage cannot be established at
this time because the use lacks a
validated livestock analytical
enforcement method for residues of
mandipropamid. EPA also determined
that the time-limited tolerance in or on
fresh basil at 20 ppm should be
removed, as it will be superseded by a
permanent tolerance on fresh basil
leaves at 30 ppm. Finally, the Agency
has revised the tolerance expression to
clarify:
1. That, as provided in FFDCA section
408(a)(3), the tolerance covers
metabolites and degradates of
mandipropamid not specifically
mentioned; and
2. That compliance with the specified
tolerance levels is to be determined by
measuring only mandipropamid.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of mandipropamid, 4chloro-N-[2-[3-methoxy-4-(2propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-a-(2propynyloxy)benzeneacetamide, in or
on basil, dried leaves at 200 ppm; basil,
fresh leaves at 30 ppm; bean, snap at
0.90 ppm; fruit, small vine climbing,
except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F
at 1.4 ppm; ginseng at 0.30 ppm; onion,
bulb, subgroup 3–07A at 0.05 ppm;
onion, green, subgroup 3–07B at 4.0
ppm; and vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10
at 1.0 ppm. This regulation additionally
removes the established tolerances in or
on grape at 1.4 ppm; onion, dry bulb at
0.05 ppm; onion, green at 4 ppm; okra
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
76992
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 245 / Friday, December 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
at 1.0 ppm; and vegetable, fruiting,
group 8 at 1.0 ppm. Finally, this
regulation removes the time-limited
tolerance in or on basil, fresh at 20 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this final rule
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this final rule is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This final rule does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerances in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
and food retailers, not States or tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:53 Dec 19, 2013
Jkt 232001
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: December 16, 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 § 180.637:
a. Revise the introductory text in
paragraph (a).
■ b. Remove ‘‘Grape’’, ‘‘Okra’’, ‘‘Onion,
dry bulb’’, ‘‘Onion green’’, and
‘‘Vegetable, fruiting, group 8’’ from the
table in paragraph (a).
■ c. Add ‘‘Basil, dried leaves’’, ‘‘Basil,
fresh leaves’’, ‘‘Bean, snap’’, ‘‘Fruit,
small vine climbing, except fuzzy
kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F’’,
‘‘Ginseng’’, ‘‘Onion, bulb, subgroup 3–
07A’’, ‘‘Onion, green, subgroup 3–07B’’,
and ‘‘Vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10’’ to
the table in paragraph (a).
■ d. Revise the introductory text in
paragraph (b).
■ e. Remove ‘‘Basil, fresh’’ from the
table in paragraph (b).
The amendments read as follows:
■
■
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
§ 180.637 Mandipropamid; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of
mandipropamid, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities listed in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by
measuring only mandipropamid (4chloro-N-[2-[3-methoxy-4-(2propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-a-(2propynyloxy)benzeneacetamide) in or
on the commodity.
Parts per
million
Commodity
Basil, dried leaves ................
Basil, fresh leaves ................
Bean, snap ...........................
200
30
0.90
*
*
*
Fruit, small vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F ....................
Ginseng ................................
*
*
*
*
Onion, bulb, subgroup 3–07A
Onion, green, subgroup 3–
07B ....................................
*
*
*
*
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8–
10 ......................................
*
*
*
*
*
1.4
0.30
*
0.05
4.0
*
1.0
*
*
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
Time-limited tolerances are established
for residues of mandipropamid,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities
listed in the table below resulting from
use of the pesticide pursuant to FFIFRA
section 18 emergency exemptions.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by
measuring only mandipropamid (4chloro-N-[2-[3-methoxy-4-(2propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-a-(2propynyloxy)benzeneacetamide) in or
on the commodity. The tolerances
expire on the date specified in the table.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–30348 Filed 12–19–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\20DER1.SGM
20DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 245 (Friday, December 20, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76987-76992]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30348]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0980; FRL-9903-57]
Mandipropamid; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances in or on multiple
commodities and removes several established tolerances for residues of
mandipropamid, which are identified and discussed later in this
document. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective December 20, 2013. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 18, 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-2012-0980, 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.
[[Page 76988]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0980 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
February 18, 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-2012-0980, by one of
the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of February 27, 2013 (78 FR 13295) (FRL-
9380-2), 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
2E8126) by IR-4, 500 College Road East, Suite 201W., Princeton, NJ
08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.637 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide mandipropamid, 4-
chloro-N-[2-[3-methoxy-4-(2-propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-alpha-(2-
propynyloxy)-benzeneacetamide, in or on basil, dried at 200 parts per
million (ppm); basil, fresh at 30 ppm; bean, succulent at 0.90 ppm;
cowpea, forage at 15 ppm; fruit, small, vine climbing, subgroup 13-07F,
except fuzzy kiwifruit at 2.0 ppm; ginseng at 0.3 ppm; onion, bulb,
subgroup 3-07A at 0.1 ppm; onion, green, subgroup 3-07B at 7.0 ppm; and
vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 at 1.0 ppm. The petition additionally
requested to remove the established tolerances in or on grape at 1.4
ppm; onion, dry bulb at 0.05 ppm; onion, green at 4 ppm; okra at 1.0
ppm; and vegetable, fruiting, group 8 at 1.0 ppm, upon establishment of
the associated proposed tolerances. That document referenced a summary
of the petition prepared on behalf of IR-4 by Syngenta Crop Protection,
the registrant, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
determined that the proposed tolerances should not be established on
succulent bean or cowpea forage, and that a tolerance should be
established on snap bean. The Agency has also determined that the
proposed tolerances in or on small vine climbing fruit subgroup 13-07F,
bulb onion subgroup 3-07A and green onion subgroup 3-07B should be
revised. EPA has also revised the commodity terminology for fresh and
dried basil and determined that the tolerance expression should be
revised for all commodities. Finally, EPA determined that the time-
limited tolerance on fresh basil should be removed. The reasons for
these changes are explained in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for mandipropamid including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with mandipropamid
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.
[[Page 76989]]
Subchronic and chronic studies indicate that the liver is the
primary target organ for mandipropamid. Liver effects were identified
in subchronic studies with rats, mice, and dogs. Liver effects included
increased plasma albumin, total protein, cholesterol, and gamma-
glutamyl transferase, as well as periportal hypertrophy in rats;
increased liver enzymes, increased pigment in hepatocytes and Kupffer
cells, and centrilobular hepatocyte vacuolation in dogs; increased
eosinophilia in rats and mice; and increased liver weights in rats,
mice and dogs. In the chronic dog study, increases in microscopic
pigment in the liver and increased liver enzymes were observed. No
liver effects were observed in chronic rat and mouse studies up to the
highest doses tested. Instead, nephrotoxicity was observed in the
chronic rat study and decreased body weight and food utilization was
observed in the chronic mouse study. The findings of liver toxicity and
nephrotoxicity are consistent with the results from metabolism studies
where the tissues with the highest levels of radioactivity were the
liver followed by the kidney.
No evidence of neurotoxicity was observed in the acute or
subchronic neurotoxicity screening battery. No systemic or dermal
toxicity was observed following dermal exposure for 28 days, up to the
limit dose. No immunotoxicity was observed up to the highest dose
tested in the mouse immunotoxicity study.
No evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility
was seen in developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits or in a
2-generation reproduction study in rats. The only effects observed in
fetuses or pups were in the 2-generation reproduction study, where
decreased pup body weight was observed in the presence of maternal
toxicity (decreased body weight, body weight gain, and food
utilization). In addition, there was a delay in preputial separation in
F1 males which was considered to be the result of lower body weights.
There was no evidence of tumors in the carcinogenicity study in
mice or in the chronic/carcinogenicity study in rats and there was no
evidence that mandipropamid was mutagenic or clastogenic. Therefore,
mandipropamid is classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to
humans.''
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by mandipropamid as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document, ``Mandipropamid: Human Health Risk
Assessment For New Uses On Basil, Ginseng and Snap Beans, as Well as
Crop Group Expansions for Fruiting Vegetable; Small Fruit, Vine
Climbing, Except Fuzzy Kiwifruit; and Bulb Onion and Green Onion
Subgroups.'' at pages 33-38 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0980.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which the NOAEL and the LOAEL are identified.
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 mandipropamid used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Mandipropamid for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure and
Exposure/scenario uncertainty/safety RfD, PAD, LOC for risk Study and toxicological
factors assessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (General population No endpoint attributable to a single exposure was identified.
including infants and children and
females 13-49 years old).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations).. NOAEL=5 mg/kg/day..... Chronic RfD = 0.05 mg/ Chronic Toxicity Study,
UFA = 10x............. kg/day. Dogs LOAEL = 40 mg/kg/day
UFH = 10x............. cPAD = 0.05 mg/kg/day. based on increased
FQPA SF = 1x.......... incidence and severity of
microscopic pigment in the
liver and increased
alkaline phosphatase
activity in both sexes as
well as increased alanine
aminotransferase activity
in males.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).. Classified as not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level
of concern. Mg/kg/day = milligrams/kilogram/day. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population
adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation
from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human
population (intraspecies).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to mandipropamid, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing mandipropamid
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.637. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
mandipropamid 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
[[Page 76990]]
occurring as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. No such effects
were identified in the toxicological studies for mandipropamid;
therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is
unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the
Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID) Version 3.16, which uses
food consumption data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
(USDA's) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, ``What We
Eat in America'' (NHANES/WWEIA) from 2003 through 2008. As to residue
levels in food, EPA used tolerance-level residues with the exception of
subgroups 13-07F, 3-07A, and 3-07B, for which EPA used residue levels
higher than the tolerance levels being established here; and tuberous
and corm vegetable subgroup 1C, which was assessed at 0.026 ppm, in
order to account for the SYN 500003 metabolite for this commodity. EPA
assessed tolerances for subgroups 13-07F, 3-07A, and 3-07B using levels
that were proposed by the petitioner and that were harmonized with
Codex maximum residue levels. However, for reasons discussed in Unit
IV.B., EPA is harmonizing these tolerance levels with the lower
Canadian maximum residue levels (MRLs). The Agency also assumed 100
percent crop treated (PCT) estimates for all commodities and utilized
default DEEM-FCID TM (ver. 7.81) processing factors, with
the exception of chemical-specific processing factors for grape wine
and sherry.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that mandipropamid does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the dietary assessment
for mandipropamid. Tolerance level residues and/or 100 PCT were assumed
for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for mandipropamid in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of mandipropamid. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) and
Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM GW), the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of mandipropamid for chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 9.0 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and 79 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 79 ppb was used to assess
the contribution from 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). Mandipropamid is not
registered for any specific use patterns that would result in
residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' EPA has not found
mandipropamid to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and mandipropamid does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that mandipropamid does
not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of
such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http: //www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA) Safety Factor (SF). In applying this provision,
EPA either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support
the choice of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There were no treatment-
related effects observed in dams or fetuses in the developmental
toxicity studies in rats or rabbits up to the limit dose of 1,000
milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day). In the rat 2-generation
reproductive study, decreased pup weight occurred only in the presence
of comparable maternal toxicity (decreased body weight, body weight
gain, and food utilization). Therefore, there is no increased
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility to rat or rabbit offspring
exposed in utero and/or postnatally to mandipropamid, and there are no
residual uncertainties with respect to prenatal or postnatal exposure.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for mandipropamid is complete.
ii. There is no indication that mandipropamid is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that mandipropamid results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessment was performed based on
100 PCT and tolerance-level residues for all commodities, with the
exception of tuberous and corm vegetable subgroup 1C, which was
assessed for the tolerance level plus the metabolite. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water
modeling used to assess exposure to mandipropamid in drinking water.
These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed
by mandipropamid.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure
[[Page 76991]]
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear
cancer risks, EPA calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring
cancer given the estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-,
and chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated
aggregate food, water, and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs
to ensure that an adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
mandipropamid is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
mandipropamid from food and water will utilize 46% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for mandipropamid.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. Short- and intermediate-term
aggregate exposure takes into account short- and intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background exposure level).
Short- and intermediate-term adverse effects were identified;
however, mandipropamid is not registered for any use patterns that
would result in short- or intermediate-term residential exposures.
Short- and intermediate-term risk is assessed based on short- and
intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure.
Because there is no short- or 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 short-term risk), no further assessment of short-
and intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating short- and intermediate-term
risk for mandipropamid.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, mandipropamid is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to mandipropamid residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology, a high performance liquid
chromatography with tandem mass spectrometric detection (LC/MS/MS), is
available to enforce the tolerance expression.
The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international MRLs established by the Codex Alimentarius
Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). The Codex
Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health Organization food standards program, and it
is recognized as an international food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to which the United States is a party.
EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL;
however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons
for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has established MRLs for mandipropamid in or on bell and
nonbell pepper at 1 ppm, bulb onion at 0.1 ppm, grape at 2 ppm, and
spring onions at 7.0 ppm. The tolerances are harmonized with the U.S.
tolerances established in or on fruiting vegetable group 8-10
(including pepper) at 1.0 ppm. However, the tolerances in or on small
vine climbing fruit except fuzzy kiwifruit subgroup 13-07F (including
grape) at 1.4 ppm, bulb onion subgroup 3-07A at 0.05 ppm, and green
onion subgroup 3-07B at 4 ppm are not harmonized with associated Codex
MRLs on these commodities because it has been determined that the major
export market for these commodities is Canada. Therefore, in order to
maintain harmonization of U.S. tolerances and Canadian MRLs for these
commodities, EPA is establishing these subgroup tolerances at the
levels that align with the Canadian MRLs. There are no Codex MRLs on
the other commodities associated with this action.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
Based on the data supporting the petition, EPA has revised basil,
fresh to basil, fresh leaves and basil, dried to basil, dried leaves in
order to correct the commodity terminology. EPA also determined that
the following proposed tolerances should be amended in order to
harmonize with Canadian MRLs on associated commodities: Small vine
climbing fruit except fuzzy kiwifruit subgroup 13-07F from 2.0 ppm to
1.4 ppm; bulb onion subgroup 3-07A from 0.1 ppm to 0.05 ppm; and green
onion subgroup 3-07B from 7.0 ppm to 4.0 ppm. Additionally, while EPA
was petitioned for a tolerance on succulent bean, no field trial data
were conducted on a succulent shelled bean cultivar in order to support
the tolerance. Instead, the petitioner submitted snap bean data, which
EPA determined is sufficient to support a tolerance of mandipropamid in
or on bean, snap at 0.90 ppm. Snap beans are a subset of the larger
succulent shelled bean definition, as defined in 40 CFR 180.1(g).
Additionally, the Agency determined that the proposed tolerance in or
on cowpea, forage cannot be established at this time because the use
lacks a validated livestock analytical enforcement method for residues
of mandipropamid. EPA also determined that the time-limited tolerance
in or on fresh basil at 20 ppm should be removed, as it will be
superseded by a permanent tolerance on fresh basil leaves at 30 ppm.
Finally, the Agency has revised the tolerance expression to clarify:
1. That, as provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), the tolerance
covers metabolites and degradates of mandipropamid not specifically
mentioned; and
2. That compliance with the specified tolerance levels is to be
determined by measuring only mandipropamid.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
mandipropamid, 4-chloro-N-[2-[3-methoxy-4-(2-propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-
[alpha]-(2-propynyloxy)benzeneacetamide, in or on basil, dried leaves
at 200 ppm; basil, fresh leaves at 30 ppm; bean, snap at 0.90 ppm;
fruit, small vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F at
1.4 ppm; ginseng at 0.30 ppm; onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A at 0.05 ppm;
onion, green, subgroup 3-07B at 4.0 ppm; and vegetable, fruiting, group
8-10 at 1.0 ppm. This regulation additionally removes the established
tolerances in or on grape at 1.4 ppm; onion, dry bulb at 0.05 ppm;
onion, green at 4 ppm; okra
[[Page 76992]]
at 1.0 ppm; and vegetable, fruiting, group 8 at 1.0 ppm. Finally, this
regulation removes the time-limited tolerance in or on basil, fresh at
20 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This final rule establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d)
in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has
been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule
is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain
any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerances in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 16, 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. 180.637:
0
a. Revise the introductory text in paragraph (a).
0
b. Remove ``Grape'', ``Okra'', ``Onion, dry bulb'', ``Onion green'',
and ``Vegetable, fruiting, group 8'' from the table in paragraph (a).
0
c. Add ``Basil, dried leaves'', ``Basil, fresh leaves'', ``Bean,
snap'', ``Fruit, small vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup
13-07F'', ``Ginseng'', ``Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A'', ``Onion, green,
subgroup 3-07B'', and ``Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10'' to the table
in paragraph (a).
0
d. Revise the introductory text in paragraph (b).
0
e. Remove ``Basil, fresh'' from the table in paragraph (b).
The amendments read as follows:
Sec. 180.637 Mandipropamid; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of
mandipropamid, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities listed in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance
levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only
mandipropamid (4-chloro-N-[2-[3-methoxy-4-(2-propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-
[alpha]-(2-propynyloxy)benzeneacetamide) in or on the commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basil, dried leaves..................................... 200
Basil, fresh leaves..................................... 30
Bean, snap.............................................. 0.90
* * * * *
Fruit, small vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, 1.4
subgroup 13-07F........................................
Ginseng................................................. 0.30
* * * * *
Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A............................. 0.05
Onion, green, subgroup 3-07B............................ 4.0
* * * * *
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10......................... 1.0
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. Time-limited tolerances are
established for residues of mandipropamid, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on the commodities listed in the table below
resulting from use of the pesticide pursuant to FFIFRA section 18
emergency exemptions. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified
below is to be determined by measuring only mandipropamid (4-chloro-N-
[2-[3-methoxy-4-(2-propynyloxy)phenyl]ethyl]-[alpha]-(2-
propynyloxy)benzeneacetamide) in or on the commodity. The tolerances
expire on the date specified in the table.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-30348 Filed 12-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P