Indaziflam; Pesticide Tolerances, 4624-4630 [2014-01363]
Download as PDF
4624
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2013–1036]
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Hillsborough River, Tampa, FL
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of deviation from
drawbridge regulation.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard has issued a
temporary deviation from the operating
schedule that governs the Hillsborough
Avenue Bridge across the Hillsborough
River, mile 4.8, at Tampa, Florida, to
facilitate repairs. The deviation is
necessary to provide repair personnel
the time needed to safely remove
equipment on the bridge prior to
opening. This deviation allows the
bridge a limited opening providing 20
feet of vertical clearance if four hours
advanced notice is given. Special
arrangements with the bridge owner can
be made for full openings.
DATES: This rule is effective without
actual notice from January 29, 2014
until 7 p.m. on May 30, 2014. For the
purposes of enforcement, actual notice
will be used from 7 a.m. on January 6,
2014, until January 29, 2014.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this
deviation, [USCG–2013–1036] is
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Type the docket number in the
‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’
Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation. You may
also visit the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12–140 on the
ground floor of the Department of
Transportation West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this temporary
deviation, call or email Mr. Michael
Lieberum, Chief Operations Section,
Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge
Branch; telephone 305–415–6744, email
michael.b.lieberum@uscg.mil. If you
have questions on viewing the docket,
call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–
9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Florida Department of Transportation
(FDOT) requested that the Hillsborough
Avenue Bridge across the Hillsborough
River, Tampa, Florida regulation be
temporarily changed during the repairs
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:55 Jan 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
to this bridge. The vertical clearance of
the bridge in the closed position is 10
feet. per 33 CFR 117.291(a), ‘‘[t]he
drawspans for the drawbridges at Platt
Street, mile 0.0, Brorein Street, mile
0.16, Kennedy Boulevard, mile 0.4, Cass
Street, mile 0.7, Laurel Street, mile 1.0,
West Columbus Drive, mile 2.3, and
West Hillsborough Avenue, mile 4.8,
must open on signal if at least two hours
notice is given; except that, the
drawspan must open on signal as soon
as possible for public vessels of the
United States.’’
An FDOT contractor originally
requested to place the bridge on a four
hour notice for a 20 foot vertical
clearance opening from November 2013
through August 2014. This request was
contested by the local marine
community; therefore, the Coast Guard
sought measures to ensure the bridge
work could be conducted safely without
unreasonably obstructing navigation
through this area. Based on
documentation received and subsequent
coordination with FDOT and local
marine interests, the Coast Guard
determined that the following
restrictions to the Hillsborough Avenue
Bridge do not unreasonably restrict
navigation and provide for the safety of
workers and the movable bridge
structure.
The Hillsborough Avenue Bridge will
open to a height of 20 feet of vertical
clearance with a four hour notice to the
bridge tender. The normal vertical
clearance of the bridge in the closed
position of 10 feet will be reduced by 4
feet to accommodate the painting tarps.
Vessels requiring less than six feet of
vertical clearance may pass at any time.
Vessels requiring more than 20 feet of
vertical clearance need to contact Mr.
Jim Fitzer, the project manager, at 813–
636–2451 to coordinate a scheduled
opening. Additionally, approximately
10 nighttime closures from 8:00 p.m.
until 6:00 a.m. may be required to
complete repairs to Hillsborough
Avenue Bridge. Notice will be
published when these nighttime
closures are required.
The Coast Guard will inform
waterway users of the change in
operating schedule for this bridge
through the Local Notice to Mariners.
Mariners are advised to use this
information in order to arrange safe
transit through this bridge and minimize
any delay caused by this temporary
deviation.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e),
the drawbridge must return to its regular
operating schedule immediately at the
end of the effective period of this
temporary deviation. This deviation
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
Dated: January 3, 2014.
B. Dragon,
Director, Seventh Coast Guard District, Bridge
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014–01600 Filed 1–28–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0014; FRL–9903–88]
Indaziflam; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of indaziflam in
or on coffee, banana, and palm oil.
Bayer Crop Science requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
January 29, 2014. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before March 31, 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–2013–0014, 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:
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM
29JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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).
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2013–0014 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 March 31, 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–
2013–0014, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:55 Jan 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
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 February
15, 2013 (78 FR 32) (FRL–9378–4), 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 2E8125) by Bayer Crop
Science, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive; P.O.
Box 12014; Research Triangle Park, NC
27709. The petition requested that 40
CFR 180.653 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of
the herbicide indaziflam, N-[(1R, 2S)2,3-dihydro-2,6-dimethyl-1H-inden-1yl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine]-6-(1fluoroethyl) and its fluoroethylindaziflam metabolite, each expressed
as the parent compound, in or on coffee
at 0.01 part per million (ppm), banana
at 0.01 ppm, and palm oil at 0.03 ppm.
That document referenced a summary of
the petition prepared by Bayer
CropScience, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. A comment was
received on the notice of filing. EPA’s
response to this comment is discussed
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
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4625
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 indaziflam
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with indaziflam 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.
The nervous system is the major target
for indaziflam toxicity in rats and dogs,
with the dog being the more sensitive
species based on neuropathology
(degenerative nerve fibers in the brain,
spinal cord and sciatic nerve). Clinical
signs of neurotoxicity were observed in
the acute, subchronic, and
developmental neurotoxicity studies
and consisted primarily of tremors,
changes in activity and reactivity,
repetitive chewing, dilated pupils, and
oral, perianal, and nasal staining.
Similar clinical signs of neurotoxicity
were observed in the 2-generation
reproduction study, the rat chronic
toxicity study, and the combined rat
carcinogenicity/chronic toxicity study.
Neuropathology findings were also
observed in the rat manifested as focal/
multifocal vacuolation of the median
eminence of the brain and the pituitary
pars nervosa and degenerative nerve
fibers in the gasserian ganglion, sciatic
nerve, and tibial nerve. Evidence of
neurotoxicity was not seen in the
mouse.
Other organs affected by indaziflam in
mice and rats include the kidney, liver,
thyroid, stomach, seminal vesicles, and
ovaries. Effects on the kidney were
observed following chronic exposure in
rats and mice while effects on the liver
were observed following chronic
exposure in the rat. Effects on the
thyroid were only observed in multiple
E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM
29JAR1
4626
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
dose rat studies. Chronic exposures also
lead to atrophied or small seminal
vesicles in male and female mice.
However, these effects occurred at
higher doses than those at which
neurotoxicity was observed in the dog.
Decreased body weight gain was
observed in most studies following
exposure to indaziflam. There was no
evidence of immunotoxicity in the
available studies, which included a
guideline immunotoxocity study in the
rat. No systemic effects were observed
in the rat following a 28-day dermal
exposure period.
No evidence of increased quantitative
or qualitative susceptibility was seen in
developmental toxicity studies in rats
and rabbits or in a reproduction study
in rats. In the rat developmental toxicity
study, decreased fetal weight was
observed in the presence of maternal
effects that included decreased body
weight gain and food consumption. No
developmental effects were observed in
rabbits up to maternally toxic dose
levels. Decreased pup weight and delays
in sexual maturation (preputial
separation in males and vaginal patency
in females) were observed in the rat 2generation reproductive toxicity study,
along with clinical signs of toxicity, at
a dose causing parental toxicity that
included coarse tremors, renal toxicity
and decreased weight gain. In the
developmental neurotoxicity study,
transiently decreased motor activity
(PND 21 only) in male offspring was
observed and was considered a potential
neurotoxic effect. It was observed at a
dose that also caused clinical signs of
neurotoxicity along with decreased
body weight in maternal animals.
Indaziflam showed no evidence of
carcinogenicity in the 2-year dietary rat
and mouse bioassays. All genotoxicity
studies that were conducted on
indaziflam were negative.
Testing in acute lethality studies with
indaziflam resulted in low toxicity via
the oral, dermal, and inhalation routes
of exposure. Indaziflam was not an
irritant to eyes Category IV) or skin and
was not a skin sensitizer.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by indaziflam as well as
the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document
Indaziflam. Human Health Risk
Assessment to Support Proposed New
Import Tolerances (Without a U.S.
Registration) on Banana, Coffee, and
Palm Oil at page 33 in docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0014.
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 indaziflam used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR INDAZIFLAM 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).
NOAEL = 7.5 mg/kg/day ...
UFA = 10x
UFH =10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Acute RfD = 0.075 mg/kg/
day.
aPAD = 0.075 mg/kg/day.
Chronic dietary (All populations) .....................................
NOAEL= 2 mg/kg/day .......
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Chronic RfD = 0.02 mg/kg/
day.
cPAD = 0.02 mg/kg/day.
Incidental oral short-term (1 to 30 days) .........................
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Exposure/scenario
NOAEL= 7.5 mg/kg/day ....
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 100 ..........
Incidental oral intermediate-term (1 to 6 months) ...........
NOAEL= 7.5 mg/kg/day ....
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 100 ..........
Subchronic Gavage Toxicity Study in Dogs.
LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
based on axonal degenerative microscopic findings in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic nerve.
Chronic Dietary Toxicity
Study in Dogs.
LOAEL = 6/7 mg/kg/day M/
F based on nerve fiber
degenerative lesions in
the brain, spinal cord
and sciatic nerve.
Subchronic Gavage Toxicity Study in Dogs.
LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
based on axonal degenerative microscopic findings in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic nerve.
Subchronic Gavage Toxicity Study in Dogs.
LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
based on axonal degenerative microscopic findings in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic nerve.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:55 Jan 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM
29JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
4627
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR INDAZIFLAM FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT—Continued
Exposure/scenario
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for risk
assessment
Study and toxicological
effects
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days) ....................................
Dermal (or oral) study
NOAEL = 7.5 mg/kg/day
(dermal absorption factor) = 7.3%.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Dermal (or oral) study
NOAEL = 7.5 mg/kg/day
(dermal absorption factor) = 7.3%.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Inhalation (or oral) study
NOAEL = 7.5 mg/kg/day
(Inhalation toxicity considered equivalent to
oral toxicity).
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Inhalation (or oral) study
NOAEL = 7.5 mg/kg/day
(Inhalation toxicity considered equivalent to
oral toxicity).
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 100 ..........
Subchronic Gavage Toxicity Study in Dogs.
LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
based on axonal degenerative microscopic findings in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic nerve.
Subchronic Gavage Toxicity Study in Dogs.
LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
based on axonal degenerative microscopic findings in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic nerve.
Subchronic Gavage Toxicity Study in Dogs.
LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
based on axonal degenerative microscopic findings in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic nerve.
Dermal intermediate-term (1 to 6 months) ......................
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 days) ................................
Inhalation (1 to 6 months) ...............................................
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) ....................................
LOC for MOE = 100 ..........
LOC for MOE = 100 ..........
LOC for MOE = 100 ..........
Subchronic Gavage Toxicity Study in Dogs.
LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
based on axonal degenerative microscopic findings in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic nerve.
No evidence of carcinogenicity. Classified as ‘‘Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans.’’
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day =
milligrams/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 indaziflam, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing
indaziflam tolerances in 40 CFR
180.653. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from indaziflam 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 indaziflam. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food
consumption information from the
United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA)’s 2003–2008 National Health
and Nutrition Examination Survey,
What We Eat in America (NHANES/
WWEIA). As to residue levels in food,
the acute dietary assessment assumes
100% crop treated (PCT) along with
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:55 Jan 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
tolerance or maximum residue level
estimates for indaziflam. It used DEEM–
WWEIA analyses to estimate the dietary
exposure of the U.S. population and
various population subgroups.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA’s 2003–2008 NHANES/
WWEIA. As to residue levels in food,
the chronic dietary assessment used the
same residue levels, analysis and PCT
assumptions used in the acute dietary
assessment.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that indaziflam 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 indaziflam. Tolerance level residues
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 indaziflam in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of indaziflam.
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
indaziflam equivalents for acute
exposures are estimated to be 84 parts
per billion (ppb) for surface water and
3.7 ppb for ground water. For chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments
E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM
29JAR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
4628
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
the estimates are 26 ppb for surface
water and 3.7 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
acute dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value of 84 ppb was used
to assess the contribution to drinking
water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 26 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). Indaziflam
is currently registered for the following
uses that could result in residential
exposures: Home lawn/turf and
gardens/tree uses. There are no new
indaziflam residential uses associated
with this regulatory action. A reevaluation of existing indaziflam
residential uses was conducted to
incorporate updated policies and
guidance in place since previous risk
assessments. Short-term dermal and
inhalation handler exposures for
residential are expected for those
making applications at their homes and
short-term dermal and incidental oral
exposures are expected via contact with
residues following applications in
outdoor home environments. For adults,
the highest exposure was from dermal
post-application high-contact (playing)
activities on treated turf during spray
applications. The highest exposure
scenarios for children 1<2 years old
were from dermal post-application highcontact (playing) and incidental oral
exposure from treated turf. These
exposure scenarios were then combined
to determine a total residential exposure
and risk estimate for children to be used
for the aggregate assessment. Further
information regarding EPA standard
assumptions and generic inputs for
residential exposures may be found at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/
science/trac6a05.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found indaziflam to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
indaziflam does not appear to produce
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:55 Jan 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that indaziflam does not have
a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
The toxicology database for indaziflam
consists of developmental toxicity
studies in rats and rabbits and a
reproduction study in rats. No
developmental effects were observed in
rabbits up to maternally toxic dose
levels. Offspring effects in the
developmental toxicity study in rats,
developmental neurotoxicity study in
rats, and the multigeneration toxicity
study in rats only occurred in the
presence of maternal toxicity and were
not considered more severe than the
parental effects. EPA concluded that
there is no evidence of increased
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility
to rat or rabbit fetuses exposed in utero
and/or post-natally to indaziflam.
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 indaziflam
is complete.
ii. The endpoints selected for risk
assessment are based on and are
protective of the neurotoxic effects seen
in the guideline studies.
iii. There is no evidence that
indaziflam results in increased
susceptibility in utero in rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on tolerance or
maximum residue levels for residues of
concern and assumed 100 PCT. EPA
made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground water and
surface water modeling used to assess
exposure to indaziflam in drinking
water. EPA used similarly conservative
assumptions to assess dermal postapplication exposure as well as
incidental oral exposure of children.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by indaziflam.
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
indaziflam will occupy 19% of the
aPAD for infants <1 year 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 indaziflam
from food and water will utilize 8% of
the cPAD for infants <1 year 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 indaziflam is not expected.
3. Short-and intermediate-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).
Indaziflam 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 indaziflam.
E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM
29JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures result in aggregate
MOEs of 1,400 for adults (postapplication) and 560 for children (postapplication). Because EPA’s level of
concern for indaziflam is a MOE of 100
or below, these MOEs are not of
concern.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
indaziflam 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 indaziflam
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(liquid chromatography with tandem
mass spectrometry detection [LC/MS/
MS] method (DH–003–P07–02) for fruit
and nut tree matrices for indaziflam and
FDAT) 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.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level. The Codex has not
established a MRL for indaziflam.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:55 Jan 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
C. Response to Comments
EPA received a comment to the notice
of filing which said that pesticide
residues should not be increased. The
Agency understands the commenter’s
concerns and recognizes that some
individuals believe that pesticides
should be banned on agricultural crops.
However, the existing legal framework
provided by section 408 of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
states that tolerances may be set when
persons seeking such tolerances or
exemptions have demonstrated that the
pesticide meets the safety standard
imposed by that statute. This citizen’s
comment appears to be directed at the
underlying statute and not EPA’s
implementation of it; the citizen has
made no contention that EPA has acted
in violation of the statutory framework.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of indaziflam, N-[(1R, 2S)2,3-dihydro-2,6-dimethyl-1H-inden-1yl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine]-6-(1fluoroethyl) and its fluoroethylindaziflam metabolite, each expressed
as the parent compound, in or on coffee,
green bean at 0.01 ppm, banana at 0.01
ppm, and palm oil at 0.03 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
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4629
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: January 10, 2014.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM
29JAR1
4630
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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 § 180.653, alphabetically add the
following commodities, redesignate
footnote 1 as footnote 2, and add a new
footnote 1 to the table in paragraph (a)
to read as follows:
■
§ 180.653 Indaziflam; tolerances for
residues.
the Regulatory Secretariat at 202–501–
4755. Please cite FAC 2005–72; FAR
Case 2010–010; Correction.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DoD, GSA,
and NASA published a document in the
Federal Register at 78 FR 80369,
December 31, 2013, inadvertently
section FAR 52.204–15, the clause
heading date is incorrectly stated; and
in section 52.212–5 the paragraphs have
been incorrectly redesignated.
Correction
In rule FR Doc. 2013–31148 published
in the Federal Register at 78 FR 80369,
December 31, 2013, make the following
Parts per
Commodity
corrections:
million
1. On page 80375, in the third
column, section 52.204–15, clause
*
*
*
*
*
heading, correct ‘‘JANUARY 30, 2014’’
Banana 1 ...................................
0.01 to read ‘‘JAN 2014’’.
1 .................
Coffee, green bean
0.01
2. On page 80376, in the first column,
section 52.212–5, under instruction
*
*
*
*
*
Palm, oil 1 ..................................
0.03 number 10, paragraph b, correct
‘‘(b)(51)’’ and ‘‘(b)(53)’’ to read as
‘‘(b)(52)’’ and ‘‘(b)(54)’’ respectively.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) General. * * *
1 No
*
Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C.
chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113.
U.S. Registrations as of 12/02/2013.
*
*
*
*
Dated: January 23, 2014.
William Clark,
Acting Director, Office of Government-wide
Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition
Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014–01363 Filed 1–28–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
for information pertaining to status or
publication schedules. Please cite FAC
2005–72, Technical Amendments.
In order to
update certain elements in 48 CFR Part
52, this document makes editorial
changes to the FAR.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
List of Subject in 48 CFR Part 52
Government procurement.
Dated: January 23, 2014.
William Clark,
Acting Director, Office of Government-wide
Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition
Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy.
Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA
amend 48 CFR part 52 as set forth
below:
PART 52—SOLICITATION PORVISIONS
AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR
part 52 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C.
chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113.
52.204–8
[Amended]
[FR Doc. 2014–01644 Filed 1–28–14; 8:45 am]
2. Remove from the clause heading
‘‘(DEC 2013)’’ and add ‘‘(JAN 2014)’’ in
its place.
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P
52.212–5
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
[FAC 2005–72; FAR Case 2010–010;
Correction; Docket 2010–0010, Sequence 1]
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
52.213–4
RIN 9000–AM06
48 CFR Part 52
[FAC 2005–72; FAR Case 2013–021;
Correction; Docket No. 2013–0021;
Sequence No. 1]
Department of Defense (DoD),
General Services Administration (GSA),
and National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Final rule; correction.
Federal Acquisition Regulation;
Technical Amendments
AGENCY:
DoD, GSA, and NASA are
issuing a correction to FAR Case 2010–
010; Service Contracts Reporting
Requirements (Item I), which was
published in the Federal Register at 78
FR 80369, December 31, 2013.
DATES: Effective: January 30, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Edward Loeb, Procurement Analyst, at
202–501–0650, for clarification of
content. For information pertaining to
status or publication schedules, contact
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
Jkt 232001
[Amended]
4. Remove from the clause heading
and paragraph (b)(1)(ii) ‘‘(DEC 2013)’’
and add ‘‘(JAN 2014)’’ in its place.
■
Federal Acquisition Regulation;
Service Contracts Reporting
Requirements; Correction
15:55 Jan 28, 2014
[Amended]
3. Remove from the clause heading
‘‘(DEC 2013)’’ and add ‘‘(JAN 2014)’’ in
its place; and remove from paragraph
(b)(27) ‘‘(DEC 2013) ERT Abbreviated
Month and Year of Publication in the
Federal Register])’’ and add ‘‘(JAN
2014)’’ in its place.
■
48 CFR Part 52
VerDate Mar<15>2010
■
Department of Defense (DoD),
General Services Administration (GSA),
and National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
52.222–19
[Amended]
5. Remove from the clause heading
‘‘(DEC 2013)’’ and add ‘‘(JAN 2014)’’ in
its place.
■
[FR Doc. 2014–01643 Filed 1–28–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P
This document makes
amendments to the Federal Acquisition
Regulation (FAR) in order to make
editorial changes.
DATES: Effective: January 29, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB),
1800 F Street NW., 2nd Floor,
Washington, DC 20405, 202–501–4755,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM
29JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 19 (Wednesday, January 29, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4624-4630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01363]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0014; FRL-9903-88]
Indaziflam; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
indaziflam in or on coffee, banana, and palm oil. Bayer Crop Science
requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective January 29, 2014. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before March 31, 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-2013-0014, 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:
[[Page 4625]]
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-2013-0014 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
March 31, 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-2013-0014, 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 February 15, 2013 (78 FR 32) (FRL-9378-
4), 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
2E8125) by Bayer Crop Science, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive; P.O. Box 12014;
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition requested that 40 CFR
180.653 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the
herbicide indaziflam, N-[(1R, 2S)-2,3-dihydro-2,6-dimethyl-1H-inden-1-
yl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine]-6-(1-fluoroethyl) and its fluoroethyl-
indaziflam metabolite, each expressed as the parent compound, in or on
coffee at 0.01 part per million (ppm), banana at 0.01 ppm, and palm oil
at 0.03 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Bayer CropScience, the registrant, which is available in
the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. A comment was received on the
notice of filing. EPA's response to this comment is discussed 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 indaziflam including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with indaziflam 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.
The nervous system is the major target for indaziflam toxicity in
rats and dogs, with the dog being the more sensitive species based on
neuropathology (degenerative nerve fibers in the brain, spinal cord and
sciatic nerve). Clinical signs of neurotoxicity were observed in the
acute, subchronic, and developmental neurotoxicity studies and
consisted primarily of tremors, changes in activity and reactivity,
repetitive chewing, dilated pupils, and oral, perianal, and nasal
staining. Similar clinical signs of neurotoxicity were observed in the
2-generation reproduction study, the rat chronic toxicity study, and
the combined rat carcinogenicity/chronic toxicity study. Neuropathology
findings were also observed in the rat manifested as focal/multifocal
vacuolation of the median eminence of the brain and the pituitary pars
nervosa and degenerative nerve fibers in the gasserian ganglion,
sciatic nerve, and tibial nerve. Evidence of neurotoxicity was not seen
in the mouse.
Other organs affected by indaziflam in mice and rats include the
kidney, liver, thyroid, stomach, seminal vesicles, and ovaries. Effects
on the kidney were observed following chronic exposure in rats and mice
while effects on the liver were observed following chronic exposure in
the rat. Effects on the thyroid were only observed in multiple
[[Page 4626]]
dose rat studies. Chronic exposures also lead to atrophied or small
seminal vesicles in male and female mice. However, these effects
occurred at higher doses than those at which neurotoxicity was observed
in the dog.
Decreased body weight gain was observed in most studies following
exposure to indaziflam. There was no evidence of immunotoxicity in the
available studies, which included a guideline immunotoxocity study in
the rat. No systemic effects were observed in the rat following a 28-
day dermal exposure period.
No evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility
was seen in developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits or in a
reproduction study in rats. In the rat developmental toxicity study,
decreased fetal weight was observed in the presence of maternal effects
that included decreased body weight gain and food consumption. No
developmental effects were observed in rabbits up to maternally toxic
dose levels. Decreased pup weight and delays in sexual maturation
(preputial separation in males and vaginal patency in females) were
observed in the rat 2-generation reproductive toxicity study, along
with clinical signs of toxicity, at a dose causing parental toxicity
that included coarse tremors, renal toxicity and decreased weight gain.
In the developmental neurotoxicity study, transiently decreased motor
activity (PND 21 only) in male offspring was observed and was
considered a potential neurotoxic effect. It was observed at a dose
that also caused clinical signs of neurotoxicity along with decreased
body weight in maternal animals.
Indaziflam showed no evidence of carcinogenicity in the 2-year
dietary rat and mouse bioassays. All genotoxicity studies that were
conducted on indaziflam were negative.
Testing in acute lethality studies with indaziflam resulted in low
toxicity via the oral, dermal, and inhalation routes of exposure.
Indaziflam was not an irritant to eyes Category IV) or skin and was not
a skin sensitizer.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by indaziflam 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 Indaziflam. Human Health Risk
Assessment to Support Proposed New Import Tolerances (Without a U.S.
Registration) on Banana, Coffee, and Palm Oil at page 33 in docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0014.
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 indaziflam used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Indaziflam 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 NOAEL = 7.5 mg/kg/day.. Acute RfD = 0.075 mg/kg/ Subchronic Gavage
including infants and children). UFA = 10x.............. day. Toxicity Study in
UFH =10x............... aPAD = 0.075 mg/kg/day. Dogs.
FQPA SF = 1x........... LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
based on axonal
degenerative
microscopic findings
in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic
nerve.
Chronic dietary (All populations).... NOAEL= 2 mg/kg/day..... Chronic RfD = 0.02 mg/ Chronic Dietary
UFA = 10x.............. kg/day. Toxicity Study in
UFH = 10x.............. cPAD = 0.02 mg/kg/day.. Dogs.
FQPA SF = 1x........... LOAEL = 6/7 mg/kg/day M/
F based on nerve fiber
degenerative lesions
in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic
nerve.
Incidental oral short-term (1 to 30 NOAEL= 7.5 mg/kg/day... LOC for MOE = 100...... Subchronic Gavage
days). UFA = 10x.............. Toxicity Study in
UFH = 10x.............. Dogs.
FQPA SF = 1x........... LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
based on axonal
degenerative
microscopic findings
in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic
nerve.
Incidental oral intermediate-term (1 NOAEL= 7.5 mg/kg/day... LOC for MOE = 100...... Subchronic Gavage
to 6 months). UFA = 10x.............. Toxicity Study in
UFH = 10x.............. Dogs.
FQPA SF = 1x........... LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
based on axonal
degenerative
microscopic findings
in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic
nerve.
[[Page 4627]]
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days)..... Dermal (or oral) study LOC for MOE = 100...... Subchronic Gavage
NOAEL = 7.5 mg/kg/day Toxicity Study in
(dermal absorption Dogs.
factor) = 7.3%. LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x.............. based on axonal
UFH = 10x.............. degenerative
FQPA SF = 1x........... microscopic findings
in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic
nerve.
Dermal intermediate-term (1 to 6 Dermal (or oral) study LOC for MOE = 100...... Subchronic Gavage
months). NOAEL = 7.5 mg/kg/day Toxicity Study in
(dermal absorption Dogs.
factor) = 7.3%. LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x.............. based on axonal
UFH = 10x.............. degenerative
FQPA SF = 1x........... microscopic findings
in the brain, spinal
cord and sciatic
nerve.
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 days). Inhalation (or oral) LOC for MOE = 100...... Subchronic Gavage
study NOAEL = 7.5 mg/ Toxicity Study in
kg/day (Inhalation Dogs.
toxicity considered LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
equivalent to oral based on axonal
toxicity). degenerative
UFA = 10x.............. microscopic findings
UFH = 10x.............. in the brain, spinal
FQPA SF = 1x........... cord and sciatic
nerve.
Inhalation (1 to 6 months)........... Inhalation (or oral) LOC for MOE = 100...... Subchronic Gavage
study NOAEL = 7.5 mg/ Toxicity Study in
kg/day (Inhalation Dogs.
toxicity considered LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day
equivalent to oral based on axonal
toxicity). degenerative
UFA = 10x.............. microscopic findings
UFH = 10x.............. in the brain, spinal
FQPA SF = 1x........... cord and sciatic
nerve.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).... No evidence of carcinogenicity. 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. 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 indaziflam, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing indaziflam tolerances in 40 CFR
180.653. EPA assessed dietary exposures from indaziflam 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 indaziflam. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used food
consumption information from the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA)'s 2003-2008 National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, the acute dietary assessment assumes 100% crop
treated (PCT) along with tolerance or maximum residue level estimates
for indaziflam. It used DEEM-WWEIA analyses to estimate the dietary
exposure of the U.S. population and various population subgroups.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA's 2003-2008
NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, the chronic dietary
assessment used the same residue levels, analysis and PCT assumptions
used in the acute dietary assessment.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that indaziflam 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 indaziflam. 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 indaziflam in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of indaziflam. 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
indaziflam equivalents for acute exposures are estimated to be 84 parts
per billion (ppb) for surface water and 3.7 ppb for ground water. For
chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments
[[Page 4628]]
the estimates are 26 ppb for surface water and 3.7 ppb for ground
water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 84 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 26 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). Indaziflam is
currently registered for the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Home lawn/turf and gardens/tree uses. There are
no new indaziflam residential uses associated with this regulatory
action. A re-evaluation of existing indaziflam residential uses was
conducted to incorporate updated policies and guidance in place since
previous risk assessments. Short-term dermal and inhalation handler
exposures for residential are expected for those making applications at
their homes and short-term dermal and incidental oral exposures are
expected via contact with residues following applications in outdoor
home environments. For adults, the highest exposure was from dermal
post-application high-contact (playing) activities on treated turf
during spray applications. The highest exposure scenarios for children
1<2 years old were from dermal post-application high-contact (playing)
and incidental oral exposure from treated turf. These exposure
scenarios were then combined to determine a total residential exposure
and risk estimate for children to be used for the aggregate assessment.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found indaziflam to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and indaziflam does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
indaziflam does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The toxicology database for
indaziflam consists of developmental toxicity studies in rats and
rabbits and a reproduction study in rats. No developmental effects were
observed in rabbits up to maternally toxic dose levels. Offspring
effects in the developmental toxicity study in rats, developmental
neurotoxicity study in rats, and the multigeneration toxicity study in
rats only occurred in the presence of maternal toxicity and were not
considered more severe than the parental effects. EPA concluded that
there is no evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative
susceptibility to rat or rabbit fetuses exposed in utero and/or post-
natally to indaziflam.
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 indaziflam is complete.
ii. The endpoints selected for risk assessment are based on and are
protective of the neurotoxic effects seen in the guideline studies.
iii. There is no evidence that indaziflam results in increased
susceptibility in utero in 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 assessments were performed based
on tolerance or maximum residue levels for residues of concern and
assumed 100 PCT. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the
ground water and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to
indaziflam in drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative
assumptions to assess dermal post-application exposure as well as
incidental oral exposure of children. These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks posed by indaziflam.
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 indaziflam will occupy 19% of the aPAD for infants <1 year 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
indaziflam from food and water will utilize 8% of the cPAD for infants
<1 year 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 indaziflam is not
expected.
3. Short-and intermediate-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).
Indaziflam 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 indaziflam.
[[Page 4629]]
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 1,400 for adults
(post-application) and 560 for children (post-application). Because
EPA's level of concern for indaziflam is a MOE of 100 or below, these
MOEs are not of concern.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, indaziflam 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 indaziflam residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (liquid chromatography with tandem
mass spectrometry detection [LC/MS/MS] method (DH-003-P07-02) for fruit
and nut tree matrices for indaziflam and FDAT) 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). 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 not
established a MRL for indaziflam.
C. Response to Comments
EPA received a comment to the notice of filing which said that
pesticide residues should not be increased. The Agency understands the
commenter's concerns and recognizes that some individuals believe that
pesticides should be banned on agricultural crops. However, the
existing legal framework provided by section 408 of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) states that tolerances may be set when
persons seeking such tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that
the pesticide meets the safety standard imposed by that statute. This
citizen's comment appears to be directed at the underlying statute and
not EPA's implementation of it; the citizen has made no contention that
EPA has acted in violation of the statutory framework.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of indaziflam,
N-[(1R, 2S)-2,3-dihydro-2,6-dimethyl-1H-inden-1-yl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-
diamine]-6-(1-fluoroethyl) and its fluoroethyl-indaziflam metabolite,
each expressed as the parent compound, in or on coffee, green bean at
0.01 ppm, banana at 0.01 ppm, and palm oil at 0.03 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 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: January 10, 2014.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
[[Page 4630]]
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. 180.653, alphabetically add the following commodities,
redesignate footnote 1 as footnote 2, and add a new footnote 1 to the
table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.653 Indaziflam; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Banana \1\................................................. 0.01
Coffee, green bean \1\..................................... 0.01
* * * * *
Palm, oil \1\.............................................. 0.03
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No U.S. Registrations as of 12/02/2013.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-01363 Filed 1-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P