Diflubenzuron; Pesticide Tolerances, 5294-5300 [2014-02064]
Download as PDF
5294
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
replacement; see paragraph (c)(130) of
this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(130) On June 20, 2013, the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources
submitted a request to remove the state’s
TSP air quality standard, sections NR
404.02(11), NR 404.04(3), and NR
484.04(3) of the Wisconsin
Administrative Code, from the state’s air
quality State Implementation Plan.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Additional material. Wisconsin
Natural Resources Board October 6,
2011, Board Order AM–23–07B to
repeal the state’s TSP air quality
standard, as published in the Wisconsin
Administrative Register November 2011,
No. 671, effective December 1, 2011.
[FR Doc. 2014–01900 Filed 1–30–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, South Coast Air
Quality Management District
CFR Correction
In Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 52 (§§ 52.01 to
52.1018), revised as of July 1, 2013, on
page 277, in § 52.220, the paragraph
designation for paragraph (311)(A)(i)(2)
is italicized and the paragraph is moved
to before paragraph (311)(A)(i)(3).
■
[FR Doc. 2014–02088 Filed 1–30–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0515; FRL–9904–27]
Diflubenzuron; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of diflubenzuron
(N-[[(4-chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]2,6-difluorobenzimide) in or on fruit,
citrus, group 10–10 and citrus, oil.
Chemtura Corporation, requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
January 31, 2014. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before April 1, 2014, and must be
filed in accordance with the instructions
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:58 Jan 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
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–2012–0515, 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, Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001;
telephone number: (703) 305–7090;
email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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–2012–0515 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 April 1, 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–
2012–0515, 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 September
12, 2013 (78 FR 56185) (FRL–9399–7),
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 2F8015) by
Chemtura Corporation,199 Benson
Road, Middlebury, CT 06749. The
petition requested that 40 CFR 180.377
be amended by establishing tolerances
for residues of the insecticide
diflubenzuron, (DFB) and its
metabolites 4-chlorophenylurea (CPU)
and 4-chloroaniline (PCA), in or on
fruit, citrus, group 10–10 at 3.0 parts per
million (ppm), and citrus, oil at 32.0
E:\FR\FM\31JAR1.SGM
31JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
ppm. That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by
Chemtura Corporation, the registrant,
which is available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
In conjunction with this rulemaking,
EPA has updated the tolerance
expression to be consistent with the
FFDCA. See Unit IV.D. EPA is also
removing the existing tolerances for
grapefruit, orange, pummelo, and
tangerine that are made redundant by
establishment of the crop group
tolerance for citrus.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
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 diflubenzuron
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with diflubenzuron 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:58 Jan 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
The acute oral, dermal and inhalation
toxicity of diflubenzuron is low. It is a
mild eye irritant and not a skin irritant
in laboratory animals. It is negative for
sensitization in the guinea pig. In
subchronic and chronic feeding studies,
the primary endpoint of concern was
methemoglobinemia and/or
sulfhemoglobinemia. These effects were
evident in both sexes of mice, rats, and
dogs and were produced by more than
one route of administration in rats (i.e.,
oral, dermal and inhalation). The
general consequence of
methemoglobinemia and/or
sulfhemoglobinemia is the impairment
of the oxygen transportation capacity of
the blood, which is generally known to
be caused by aromatic amines in both
humans and animals. Degradates of
diflubenzuron with aromatic amines,
CPU and PCA, are also included in the
diflubenzuron non-cancer risk
assessment. CPU, an analog of monuron,
does not effect methemoglobin
formation but does produce tumors in
the liver and kidneys of male rats. The
toxicity of PCA is well understood with
methemoglobin formation the primary
systemic effect. PCA is similar in
potency to diflubenzuron on
methemoglobin formation. Therefore,
the non-cancer assessment will include
diflubenzuron, CPU and PCA. Since the
toxicity of CPU and PCA is well
understood, additional toxicity studies
are not required.
The toxicity data provide no
indication of an increased susceptibility
to rats or to rabbits from in utero or
postnatal exposure to diflubenzuron.
Developmental and reproduction
studies in rats and rabbits indicate a
very low hazard potential for adverse
effects. Developmental studies were
tested at the limit dose of 1,000
milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day)
without apparent effects in both dams
and the fetuses. The reproduction study
indicated that effects in offspring
occurred at doses that were higher than
the doses producing effects in parents.
The requirement for acute and
subchronic neurotoxicity studies were
recently waived because there are no
clear signs of neurotoxicity following
subchronic or chronic dosing in
multiple species in the diflubenzuron
database. The toxicity profile of
diflubenzuron shows that the principal
toxic effects are the formation of
methemoglobinemia and/or
sulfhemoglobinemia in the blood. The
immunotoxicity study has been
reviewed and immunotoxicity was not
observed above the limit dose.
The Agency concluded that
diflubenzuron is not carcinogenic in
humans based on lack of evidence of
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
5295
carcinogenicity in rats and mice. PCA,
a plant metabolite of diflubenzuron,
tested positive for splenic tumors in
male rats and hepatocellular adenomas/
carcinomas in male mice in a National
Toxicology Program (NTP) study.
Therefore, EPA has treated PCA as a
probable human carcinogen. CPU is the
major degradate found in water and is
a significant metabolite in milk. CPU is
structurally related to monuron (N,Ndimethyl-CPU), a compound producing
tumors of the kidney and liver in male
rats. EPA has assumed CPU is a
probable human carcinogen as well.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by diflubenzuron 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,
‘‘Diflubenzuron: Human Health Risk
Assessment for an Amended Section 3
Registration for the Expanded Citrus
Crop Group 10–10.’’ in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0515.
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 (LOC) 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 diflubenzuron used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 and 2 of this unit.
E:\FR\FM\31JAR1.SGM
31JAR1
5296
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR DIFLUBENZURON FOR USE IN DIETARY HUMAN
HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENTS
RfD, PAD, LOC
for risk
assessment
Exposure/scenario
POD
Uncertainty/
FQPA safety factors
Study and
toxicological effects
Acute dietary all populations ........
N/A .............................
N/A .............................
No appropriate endpoint attributable to single exposure
was available
Chronic dietary all populations ....
NOAEL = 2 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10X
UFH = 10X
FQPA SF = 1X
cPAD = chronic RfD
FQPA SF = 0.02
mg/kg/day.
Cancer (all routes) Diflubenzuron
Classification: ‘‘Group E’’ evidence of non- carcinogenicity for humans.
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation)
PCA ‘‘Group B2’’
probably human
carcinogen Q1*.
1.12 × 10¥1 (mg/kg/
day)¥1
N/A .............................
NTP oral mouse study.
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation)
CPU Q1* based on
monuron a structural analog and the
Q1* 1.52 × 10¥2.
N/A .............................
NTP oral rat study.
Chronic dog study 00146174.
LOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day based on
methemoglobinemia
and
sulfhemoglobinemia.
Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is derived from observed dose-response data and used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally relevant human exposures.
NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from
animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). FQPA SF = Food
Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern. N/A = not applicable.
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR DIFLUBENZURON FOR USE IN RESIDENTIAL AND
OCCUPATIONAL HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENTS
Exposure/scenario
POD
Uncertainty/
factors
Level of
concern
for risk
assessment
Short- and intermediate-term incidental oral (1 day–6 months)
(residential).
N/A .............................
N/A .............................
N/A .............................
Short-term dermal (1–30 days)
(occupational).
NOAEL = 500 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10X .................
UFH = 10X
LOC for MOE = 100 ..
Dermal intermediate term (1–6
months).
NOAEL = 2 mg/kg/day
LOC for MOE = 100 ..
Inhalation short term (1–30 days)
0.109 mg/L
20.30 1 mg/
LOC for MOE = 100 ..
28-day Inhalation rat study.
No effect at HDT 2, 0.109 mg/L.
0.109 mg/L
20.30 1 mg/
UFA = 10X .................
UFH =10X
LOC for MOE = 100 ..
28-day Inhalation rat study.
No effect at HDT, 0.109 mg/L.
Inhalation long term (1–6 months)
NOAEL =
NOAEL =
kg/day
NOAEL =
NOAEL =
kg/day
NOAEL =
UFA = 10X .................
UFH = 10X
dermal absorption:
0.5%.
UFA = 10X .................
UFH = 10X
2 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10X .................
UFH = 10X
LOC for MOE = 100 ..
Chronic dog study.
LOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day based on
methemoglobinemia and
sulfhemoglobinemia.
Cancer (all routes) .......................
Classification: ‘‘Group E’’ evidence of non- carcinogenicity for humans.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Inhalation intermediate term (1–6
months).
Study and
toxicological effects
These endpoints were not evaluated. There are no registered
uses of diflubenzuron which result in significant residential exposure.
21-day rat dermal
LOAEL = 1,000 mg/kg/day based
on methemoglobinemia.
13—week oral dog
LOAEL = 6.4 mg/kg/day based
on methemoglobinemia.
1 Conversion from mg/L to oral dose (mg/kg/day) = mg/L × absorption (1.0) × Respiratory Volume (Sprague-Dawley rats) for 6 hours/d × Duration of Exposure (5 d/week)/body weight × 7 d/week = 0.109 mg/L × 1.0 × (0.26(RV) × 6 hrs) × 5 d/wk ÷ 0.236 kg × 7 d/wk = 20.3 mg/kg/day
(TXR 0050503).
2 Highest Dose Tested.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:58 Jan 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\31JAR1.SGM
31JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to diflubenzuron, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing diflubenzuron tolerances in 40
CFR 180.377. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from diflubenzuron in food as
follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide if
a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1-day or single
exposure. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies
for diflubenzuron; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic non-cancer dietary exposure
assessment, EPA used the food
consumption data from the United
States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) 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 the assumption that
diflubenzuron residues are present in
most commodities at tolerance levels
(including tolerances previously
established as well as those established
in this action) and that 100% of all
crops are treated. Average field trial
residues were assumed for grapefruit,
lemon, and orange. Tolerances include
residues of diflubenzuron, PCA, and
CPU.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that diflubenzuron does not
pose a cancer risk to humans. However,
metabolites CPU and PCA are
considered probable carcinogens and
have Q*s assigned to them. Individual
cancer dietary exposure analyses were
conducted for each metabolite. For PCA,
average percent crop treated (PCT) was
used for some commodities. One-half
the Limit of Quantitation (LOQ) was
used for estimating PCA residues on the
majority of crops because most crops
did not contain detectable residues of
PCA. Average field trial residue was
used for mushrooms. The CPU cancer
dietary analysis focused on CPU
residues in milk because metabolism
studies indicate that diflubenzuron
metabolizes to CPU in milk. EPA
assumed that 100% of milk
commodities contained CPU at 1⁄2 the
LOQ. One-half the LOQ was used since
detectable residues of CPU were not
found in the feeding study.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:58 Jan 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. Section 408(b)(2)(E) of
FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available
data and information on the anticipated
residue levels of pesticide residues in
food and the actual levels of pesticide
residues that have been measured in
food. If EPA relies on such information,
EPA must require pursuant to FFDCA
section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5
years after the tolerance is established,
modified, or left in effect, demonstrating
that the levels in food are not above the
levels anticipated. For the present
action, EPA will issue such Data CallIns as are required by FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be
required to be submitted no later than
5 years from the date of issuance of
these tolerances.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states
that the Agency may use data on the
actual percent of food treated for
assessing chronic dietary risk only if:
• Condition a: The data used are
reliable and provide a valid basis to
show what percentage of the food
derived from such crop is likely to
contain the pesticide residue.
• Condition b: The exposure estimate
does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group.
• Condition c: Data are available on
pesticide use and food consumption in
a particular area, the exposure estimate
does not understate exposure for the
population in such area.
In addition, the Agency must provide
for periodic evaluation of any estimates
used. To provide for the periodic
evaluation of the estimate of PCT as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F),
EPA may require registrants to submit
data on PCT.
The Agency estimated the PCT for
existing uses as follows: Almond (10%),
apricot (10%), artichoke (50%), cotton
(1%), grapefruit (15%), oranges (5%),
peach (5%), peanut (5%), pear (5%),
pecan (2.5%), peppers (1%), rice (1%),
soybeans (1%), tangerines (5%), and
wheat (1%).
In most cases, EPA uses available data
from USDA/National Agricultural
Statistics Service (NASS), proprietary
market surveys, and the National
Pesticide Use Database for the chemical/
crop combination for the most recent 6
to 7 years. EPA uses an average PCT for
chronic dietary risk analysis. The
average PCT figure for each existing use
is derived by combining available
public and private market survey data
for that use, averaging across all
observations, and rounding to the
nearest 5%, except for those situations
in which the average PCT is less than
one. In those cases, 1% is used as the
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
5297
average PCT and 2.5% is used as the
maximum PCT. EPA uses a maximum
PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the highest
observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available
public and private market survey data
for the existing use and rounded up to
the nearest multiple of 5%.
The Agency believes that the three
conditions discussed in Unit III.C.1.iv.
have been met. With respect to
Condition a, PCT estimates are derived
from Federal and private market survey
data, which are reliable and have a valid
basis. The Agency is reasonably certain
that the percentage of the food treated
is not likely to be an underestimation.
As to Conditions b and c, regional
consumption information and
consumption information for significant
subpopulations is taken into account
through EPA’s computer-based model
for evaluating the exposure of
significant subpopulations, including
several regional groups. Use of this
consumption information in EPA’s risk
assessment process ensures that EPA’s
exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant
subpopulation group and allows the
Agency to be reasonably certain that no
regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those
estimated by the Agency. Other than the
data available through national food
consumption surveys, EPA does not
have available reliable information on
the regional consumption of food to
which diflubenzuron may be applied in
a particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for diflubenzuron in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
diflubenzuron. 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.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model.
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 (EDWC) of 12.8
microgram/Liter (mg/L) (including
diflubenzuron and CPU) was used to
assess chronic non-cancer dietary risk.
CPU cancer risk was assessed using the
EDWC of 8.81 mg/L.
E:\FR\FM\31JAR1.SGM
31JAR1
5298
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
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).
Although there are no registered
homeowner uses, there are registered
uses for professional applications to
outdoor trees and ornamentals in
residential areas. However, given the
effects in the 21-day dermal toxicity
study were only observed at the limit
dose (1,000 mg/kg/day) and the dermal
absorption is extremely low (0.5%) as
well as the intermittent potential for
post-application residential exposure to
ornamentals (i.e., contact with
ornamentals every day is not likely), a
residential post-application assessment
is not required at this time.
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 diflubenzuron to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
diflubenzuron does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that diflubenzuron 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
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) SF.
In applying this provision, EPA either
retains the default value of 10X, or uses
a different additional SF when reliable
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:58 Jan 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
Based on the available developmental
toxicity studies in rats and rabbits and
the reproduction study, there is no
increased susceptibility to fetuses
exposed in utero.
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 toxicological database for
diflubenzuron is complete. The toxicity
of CPU and PCA is well understood.
CPU is less toxic and does not affect
methemoglobin. PCA does cause
methemoglobin formation but is similar
in potency to diflubenzuron. Therefore,
assuming equal toxicity of CPU and
PCA to diflubenzuron is health
protective, additional toxicity studies
are not required.
ii. There are no clear signs of
neurotoxicity following subchronic or
chronic dosing in multiple species in
the diflubenzuron database; therefore,
there is no need for any neurotoxicity
studies.
iii. There is no evidence that
diflubenzuron 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. The dietary exposure assessment
uses conservative assumptions which
will not underestimate dietary exposure
and EPA made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground and surface
water modeling used to assess exposure
to diflubenzuron in drinking water.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by diflubenzuron.
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 aPAD and 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
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, diflubenzuron 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 diflubenzuron
from food and water will utilize 37% of
the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old,
the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. There are no
residential uses for diflubenzuron.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). A short-term adverse
effect was identified; however,
diflubenzuron is not registered for any
use patterns that would result in shortterm residential exposure; therefore, no
further assessment of short-term risk is
necessary.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level). An
intermediate-term adverse effect was
identified; however, diflubenzuron is
not registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure; therefore, no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
diflubenzuron is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans. However,
metabolites CPU and PCA are
considered probable carcinogens and
have Q*s assigned to them. Individual
cancer dietary exposure analyses were
conducted for each metabolite. The
cancer assessment for PCA includes
food only (not present in drinking
water). The cancer assessment for CPU
includes milk and water only. For PCA,
the cancer dietary exposure estimate for
the U.S. population is 1 × 10¥6. For
CPU, the cancer dietary exposure
estimate for the U.S. population is 3 ×
10¥6.
EPA generally considers cancer risks
in the range of 10¥6 or less to be
negligible. The precision which can be
assumed for cancer risk estimates is best
described by rounding to the nearest
integral order of magnitude on the log
scale; for example, risks falling between
3 × 10 7 and 3 × 10¥6 are expressed
as risks in the range of 10¥6.
Considering the precision with which
cancer hazard can be estimated, the
conservativeness of low-dose linear
E:\FR\FM\31JAR1.SGM
31JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
extrapolation, and the rounding
procedure described above, cancer risk
should generally not be assumed to
exceed the benchmark level of concern
of the range of 10¥6 until the calculated
risk exceeds approximately 3 × 10¥6.
This is particularly the case where some
conservatism is maintained in the
exposure assessment. Although the PCA
and CPU exposure risk assessment are
refined, they retain significant
conservatism in that residues in food
were estimated at 1⁄2 LOQ even though
no residues were detected in field trials
and feeding studies, and for some
commodities EPA assumed 100 PCT.
Accordingly, EPA has concluded the
cancer risk for all existing
diflubenzuron uses, and the uses
associated with the tolerances
established in this action fall within the
range of 1 × 10¥6 and are thus
negligible.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to
diflubenzuron residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(gas chromatography/electron capture
detection (ECD) and high-performance
liquid chromatography/ultraviolet
(HPLC/UV)) is available to enforce the
tolerance expression.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD 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 established MRLs for
diflubenzuron, expressed in terms of
diflubenzuron per se, for many
including: Citrus, fruits 0.5 ppm. This
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:58 Jan 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
MRL is different than the citrus crop
group tolerance being established for
diflubenzuron in this action.
Numerical compatibility with Codex
is not possible as the good agricultural
practices used for the Codex MRL are
different from the proposed use pattern
in the U.S. Additionally, the tolerance
expression for the Codex MRL and the
U.S. tolerance are not the same, only the
U.S. tolerance contains the CPU and
PCA metabolites. EPA is re-examining
whether it can harmonize the U.S.
tolerance expression with the Codex
MRL, but making this change alone
would not harmonize the numerical
difference.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
EPA is revising the tolerance
expression to clarify that, as provided in
FFDCA section 408(a)(3), the tolerance
covers metabolites and degradates of
diflubenzuron not specifically
mentioned; and that compliance with
the specified tolerance levels is to be
determined by measuring only the
specific compounds mentioned in the
tolerance expression. Therefore, the
tolerance expression for diflubenzuron
will be revised under 40 CFR 180.377
(a)(1), (a)(2), and (b) (see the regulatory
text of this document).
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of diflubenzuron, (N-[[(4chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6difluorobenzimide) in or on fruit, citrus,
group 10–10 at 3.0 ppm; and citrus, oil
at 32 ppm. The Agency is removing the
currently established tolerances for
grapefruit, orange, pummel, and
tangerine from 40 CFR 180.377. These
tolerances are being replaced by the
tolerance for fruit, citrus, group 10–10.
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,
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
5299
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
E:\FR\FM\31JAR1.SGM
31JAR1
5300
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 21 / Friday, January 31, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Parts per
million
Commodity
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
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 § 180.377:
a. Revise the introductory text in
paragraph (a)(1).
■ b. Remove ‘‘Grapefruit’’, ‘‘Orange
sweet’’, and ‘‘Tangerine’’ from the table
in paragraph (a)(1).
■ c. Revise the introductory text in
paragraph (a)(2).
■ d. Remove ‘‘Pummelo’’, from the table
in paragraph (a)(2).
■ e. Add Citrus, oil, and Fruit, citrus,
group 10–10 to the table in paragraph
(a)(2).
■ f. Revise the introductory text in
paragraph (b).
The amendments read as follows:
■
■
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 180.377 Diflubenzuron; tolerances for
residues.
Jkt 232001
*
*
*
*
Fruit, citrus, group 10–10 ...........
*
*
*
32
3.0
*
*
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
Time-limited tolerances are established
for residues of the insecticide
diflubenzuron (N-[[(4chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6difluorobenzamide) and its metabolites,
in connection with use of the pesticide
under section 18 emergency exemptions
granted by EPA. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified below is to be
determined by measuring only the sum
of diflubenzuron (N-[[(4chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6difluorobenzamide), 4chlorophenylyurea and 4-chloroaniline,
calculated as the stoichiometric
equivalent of diflubenzuron, in or on
the commodity. The tolerances are
specified in the following table, and will
expire and are revoked on the dates
specified.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2014–02064 Filed 1–30–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are
established for residues of
diflubenzuron, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by
measuring only diflubenzuron (N-[[(4chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6difluorobenzamide).
*
*
*
*
*
(2) Tolerances are established for
residues of the insecticide
diflubenzuron (N-[[(4chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6difluorobenzamide), in or on the
commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by
measuring only the sum of
diflubenzuron (N-[[(4chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6difluorobenzamide), 4chlorophenylyurea and 4-chloroaniline,
calculated as the stoichiometric
equivalent of diflubenzuron, in or on
the commodity.
17:58 Jan 30, 2014
*
*
Dated: January 17, 2014.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
*
*
*
Citrus, oil .....................................
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 101206604–1758–02]
RIN 0648–XC464
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic; Coastal
Migratory Pelagic Resources of the
Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; closure.
AGENCY:
NMFS implements an
accountability measure (AM) through
this temporary final rule for commercial
harvest of king mackerel in the southern
Florida west coast subzone of the
eastern zone of the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf)
exclusive economic zone (EEZ) using
run-around gillnet gear. NMFS has
determined that the commercial annual
catch limit (ACL) (equal to the
commercial quota) for king mackerel
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
using run-around gillnet gear in the
southern Florida west coast subzone of
the Gulf EEZ will have been reached by
January 29, 2014. Therefore, NMFS
closes the southern Florida west coast
subzone to commercial king mackerel
fishing using run-around gillnet gear in
the Gulf EEZ. This closure is necessary
to protect the Gulf king mackerel
resource.
The closure is effective 12:01
p.m., eastern standard time, January 29,
2014, through 6 a.m., eastern standard
time, January 20, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Gerhart, telephone: 727–824–
5305, email: Susan.Gerhart@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
fishery for coastal migratory pelagic fish
(king mackerel, Spanish mackerel, and
cobia) is managed under the Fishery
Management Plan for the Coastal
Migratory Pelagic Resources of the Gulf
of Mexico and South Atlantic (FMP).
The FMP was prepared by the Gulf of
Mexico and South Atlantic Fishery
Management Councils and is
implemented under the authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations
at 50 CFR part 622.
Gulf migratory group king mackerel’s
Florida west coast subzone of the Gulf
eastern zone is divided into northern
and southern subzones, each with
separate quotas. The southern subzone
is that part of the Florida west coast
subzone, which from November 1
through March 31, extends south and
west from 25°20.4’ N. lat. (a line directly
east from the Miami-Dade/Monroe
County, FL, boundary), north to 26°19.8’
N. lat. (a line directly west from the Lee/
Collier County, FL, boundary), i.e., the
area off Monroe and Collier Counties.
From April 1 through October 31, the
southern subzone is that part of the
Florida west coast subzone that is
between 26°19.8’ N. lat. (a line directly
west from the Lee/Collier County, FL,
boundary) and 25°48’ N. lat. (a line
directly west from the Monroe/Collier
County, FL, boundary), i.e., the area off
Collier County (50 CFR
622.384(b)(1)(i)(C)).
On January 30, 2012 (76 FR 82058,
December 29, 2011), NMFS
implemented a commercial ACL
(commercial quota) for the Gulf
migratory group king mackerel in the
southern Florida west coast subzone of
551,448 lb (250,133 kg) for vessels using
run-around gillnet gear (50 CFR
622.384(b)(1)(i)(B)(1)), for the current
fishing year, July 1, 2013, through June
30, 2014.
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\31JAR1.SGM
31JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 21 (Friday, January 31, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5294-5300]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02064]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0515; FRL-9904-27]
Diflubenzuron; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
diflubenzuron (N-[[(4-chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6-
difluorobenzimide) in or on fruit, citrus, group 10-10 and citrus, oil.
Chemtura Corporation, requested these tolerances under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective January 31, 2014. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 1, 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-2012-0515, 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,
Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 305-7090; email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0515 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
April 1, 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-2012-0515, 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 September 12, 2013 (78 FR 56185) (FRL-
9399-7), 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
2F8015) by Chemtura Corporation,199 Benson Road, Middlebury, CT 06749.
The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.377 be amended by establishing
tolerances for residues of the insecticide diflubenzuron, (DFB) and its
metabolites 4-chlorophenylurea (CPU) and 4-chloroaniline (PCA), in or
on fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 3.0 parts per million (ppm), and
citrus, oil at 32.0
[[Page 5295]]
ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by
Chemtura Corporation, the registrant, which is available in the docket,
https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response
to the notice of filing.
In conjunction with this rulemaking, EPA has updated the tolerance
expression to be consistent with the FFDCA. See Unit IV.D. EPA is also
removing the existing tolerances for grapefruit, orange, pummelo, and
tangerine that are made redundant by establishment of the crop group
tolerance for citrus.
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 diflubenzuron including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with diflubenzuron
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 acute oral, dermal and inhalation toxicity of diflubenzuron is
low. It is a mild eye irritant and not a skin irritant in laboratory
animals. It is negative for sensitization in the guinea pig. In
subchronic and chronic feeding studies, the primary endpoint of concern
was methemoglobinemia and/or sulfhemoglobinemia. These effects were
evident in both sexes of mice, rats, and dogs and were produced by more
than one route of administration in rats (i.e., oral, dermal and
inhalation). The general consequence of methemoglobinemia and/or
sulfhemoglobinemia is the impairment of the oxygen transportation
capacity of the blood, which is generally known to be caused by
aromatic amines in both humans and animals. Degradates of diflubenzuron
with aromatic amines, CPU and PCA, are also included in the
diflubenzuron non-cancer risk assessment. CPU, an analog of monuron,
does not effect methemoglobin formation but does produce tumors in the
liver and kidneys of male rats. The toxicity of PCA is well understood
with methemoglobin formation the primary systemic effect. PCA is
similar in potency to diflubenzuron on methemoglobin formation.
Therefore, the non-cancer assessment will include diflubenzuron, CPU
and PCA. Since the toxicity of CPU and PCA is well understood,
additional toxicity studies are not required.
The toxicity data provide no indication of an increased
susceptibility to rats or to rabbits from in utero or postnatal
exposure to diflubenzuron. Developmental and reproduction studies in
rats and rabbits indicate a very low hazard potential for adverse
effects. Developmental studies were tested at the limit dose of 1,000
milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) without apparent effects in both
dams and the fetuses. The reproduction study indicated that effects in
offspring occurred at doses that were higher than the doses producing
effects in parents. The requirement for acute and subchronic
neurotoxicity studies were recently waived because there are no clear
signs of neurotoxicity following subchronic or chronic dosing in
multiple species in the diflubenzuron database. The toxicity profile of
diflubenzuron shows that the principal toxic effects are the formation
of methemoglobinemia and/or sulfhemoglobinemia in the blood. The
immunotoxicity study has been reviewed and immunotoxicity was not
observed above the limit dose.
The Agency concluded that diflubenzuron is not carcinogenic in
humans based on lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in rats and mice.
PCA, a plant metabolite of diflubenzuron, tested positive for splenic
tumors in male rats and hepatocellular adenomas/carcinomas in male mice
in a National Toxicology Program (NTP) study. Therefore, EPA has
treated PCA as a probable human carcinogen. CPU is the major degradate
found in water and is a significant metabolite in milk. CPU is
structurally related to monuron (N,N-dimethyl-CPU), a compound
producing tumors of the kidney and liver in male rats. EPA has assumed
CPU is a probable human carcinogen as well.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by diflubenzuron 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, ``Diflubenzuron: Human Health Risk
Assessment for an Amended Section 3 Registration for the Expanded
Citrus Crop Group 10-10.'' in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0515.
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 (LOC) 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 diflubenzuron used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 and 2 of this unit.
[[Page 5296]]
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Diflubenzuron for Use in Dietary Human Health Risk
Assessments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Study and
Exposure/scenario POD Uncertainty/ FQPA RfD, PAD, LOC for toxicological
safety factors risk assessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary all populations... N/A............... N/A............... No appropriate endpoint attributable
to single exposure was available
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary all populations. NOAEL = 2 mg/kg/ UFA = 10X cPAD = chronic RfD Chronic dog study
day. UFH = 10X......... FQPA SF = 0.02 mg/ 00146174.
FQPA SF = 1X...... kg/day. LOAEL = 10 mg/kg/
day based on
methemoglobinemia
and
sulfhemoglobinemi
a.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (all routes) Classification: ``Group E'' evidence of non- carcinogenicity for humans.
Diflubenzuron.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (oral, dermal, PCA ``Group B2'' N/A............... NTP oral mouse study.
inhalation). probably human
carcinogen Q1*.
1.12 x 10-1 (mg/kg/
day)-1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (oral, dermal, CPU Q1* based on N/A............... NTP oral rat study.
inhalation). monuron a
structural analog
and the Q1* 1.52
x 10-2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is derived from observed dose-response data
and used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally
relevant human exposures.
NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. UF = uncertainty factor.
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among
members of the human population (intraspecies). FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD =
population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level
of concern. N/A = not applicable.
Table 2--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Diflubenzuron for Use in Residential and Occupational
Human Health Risk Assessments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level of concern Study and
Exposure/scenario POD Uncertainty/ for risk toxicological
factors assessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short- and intermediate-term N/A............... N/A............... N/A............... These endpoints
incidental oral (1 day-6 were not
months) (residential). evaluated. There
are no registered
uses of
diflubenzuron
which result in
significant
residential
exposure.
Short-term dermal (1-30 days) NOAEL = 500 mg/kg/ UFA = 10X......... LOC for MOE = 100. 21-day rat dermal
(occupational). day. UFH = 10X......... LOAEL = 1,000 mg/
kg/day based on
methemoglobinemia
.
Dermal intermediate term (1-6 NOAEL = 2 mg/kg/ UFA = 10X......... LOC for MOE = 100. 13--week oral dog
months). day. UFH = 10X......... LOAEL = 6.4 mg/kg/
dermal absorption: day based on
0.5%. methemoglobinemia
.
Inhalation short term (1-30 NOAEL = 0.109 mg/L UFA = 10X......... LOC for MOE = 100. 28-day Inhalation
days). NOAEL = 20.30 \1\ UFH = 10X......... rat study.
mg/kg/day. No effect at HDT
\2\, 0.109 mg/L.
Inhalation intermediate term (1- NOAEL = 0.109 mg/L UFA = 10X......... LOC for MOE = 100. 28-day Inhalation
6 months). NOAEL = 20.30 \1\ UFH =10X.......... rat study.
mg/kg/day. No effect at HDT,
0.109 mg/L.
Inhalation long term (1-6 NOAEL = 2 mg/kg/ UFA = 10X......... LOC for MOE = 100. Chronic dog study.
months). day. UFH = 10X......... LOAEL = 10 mg/kg/
day based on
methemoglobinemia
and
sulfhemoglobinemi
a.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (all routes)............. Classification: ``Group E'' evidence of non- carcinogenicity for humans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Conversion from mg/L to oral dose (mg/kg/day) = mg/L x absorption (1.0) x Respiratory Volume (Sprague-Dawley
rats) for 6 hours/d x Duration of Exposure (5 d/week)/body weight x 7 d/week = 0.109 mg/L x 1.0 x (0.26(RV) x
6 hrs) x 5 d/wk / 0.236 kg x 7 d/wk = 20.3 mg/kg/day (TXR 0050503).
\2\ Highest Dose Tested.
[[Page 5297]]
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to diflubenzuron, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing diflubenzuron
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.377. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
diflubenzuron in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies for diflubenzuron; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic non-cancer dietary
exposure assessment, EPA used the food consumption data from the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 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 the assumption
that diflubenzuron residues are present in most commodities at
tolerance levels (including tolerances previously established as well
as those established in this action) and that 100% of all crops are
treated. Average field trial residues were assumed for grapefruit,
lemon, and orange. Tolerances include residues of diflubenzuron, PCA,
and CPU.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that diflubenzuron does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
However, metabolites CPU and PCA are considered probable carcinogens
and have Q*s assigned to them. Individual cancer dietary exposure
analyses were conducted for each metabolite. For PCA, average percent
crop treated (PCT) was used for some commodities. One-half the Limit of
Quantitation (LOQ) was used for estimating PCA residues on the majority
of crops because most crops did not contain detectable residues of PCA.
Average field trial residue was used for mushrooms. The CPU cancer
dietary analysis focused on CPU residues in milk because metabolism
studies indicate that diflubenzuron metabolizes to CPU in milk. EPA
assumed that 100% of milk commodities contained CPU at \1/2\ the LOQ.
One-half the LOQ was used since detectable residues of CPU were not
found in the feeding study.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. Section 408(b)(2)(E)
of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and information on the
anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in food and the actual
levels of pesticide residues that have been measured in food. If EPA
relies on such information, EPA must require pursuant to FFDCA section
408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is
established, modified, or left in effect, demonstrating that the levels
in food are not above the levels anticipated. For the present action,
EPA will issue such Data Call-Ins as are required by FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be
required to be submitted no later than 5 years from the date of
issuance of these tolerances.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary
risk only if:
Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a
valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop
is likely to contain the pesticide residue.
Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
Condition c: Data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area.
In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any
estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate
of PCT as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require
registrants to submit data on PCT.
The Agency estimated the PCT for existing uses as follows: Almond
(10%), apricot (10%), artichoke (50%), cotton (1%), grapefruit (15%),
oranges (5%), peach (5%), peanut (5%), pear (5%), pecan (2.5%), peppers
(1%), rice (1%), soybeans (1%), tangerines (5%), and wheat (1%).
In most cases, EPA uses available data from USDA/National
Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), proprietary market surveys, and
the National Pesticide Use Database for the chemical/crop combination
for the most recent 6 to 7 years. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic
dietary risk analysis. The average PCT figure for each existing use is
derived by combining available public and private market survey data
for that use, averaging across all observations, and rounding to the
nearest 5%, except for those situations in which the average PCT is
less than one. In those cases, 1% is used as the average PCT and 2.5%
is used as the maximum PCT. EPA uses a maximum PCT for acute dietary
risk analysis. The maximum PCT figure is the highest observed maximum
value reported within the recent 6 years of available public and
private market survey data for the existing use and rounded up to the
nearest multiple of 5%.
The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed in Unit
III.C.1.iv. have been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates
are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are
reliable and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that
the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an
underestimation. As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption
information and consumption information for significant subpopulations
is taken into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating
the exposure of significant subpopulations, including several regional
groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment
process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency
to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than
the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does
not have available reliable information on the regional consumption of
food to which diflubenzuron may be applied in a particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for diflubenzuron in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of diflubenzuron. 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.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model.
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 (EDWC) of
12.8 microgram/Liter ([mu]g/L) (including diflubenzuron and CPU) was
used to assess chronic non-cancer dietary risk. CPU cancer risk was
assessed using the EDWC of 8.81 [mu]g/L.
[[Page 5298]]
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).
Although there are no registered homeowner uses, there are
registered uses for professional applications to outdoor trees and
ornamentals in residential areas. However, given the effects in the 21-
day dermal toxicity study were only observed at the limit dose (1,000
mg/kg/day) and the dermal absorption is extremely low (0.5%) as well as
the intermittent potential for post-application residential exposure to
ornamentals (i.e., contact with ornamentals every day is not likely), a
residential post-application assessment is not required at this time.
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 diflubenzuron to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and diflubenzuron does not appear
to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
diflubenzuron 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 Food Quality
Protection Act (FQPA) SF. In applying this provision, EPA either
retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional SF
when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. Based on the available
developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits and the reproduction
study, there is no increased susceptibility to fetuses exposed in
utero.
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 toxicological database for diflubenzuron is complete. The
toxicity of CPU and PCA is well understood. CPU is less toxic and does
not affect methemoglobin. PCA does cause methemoglobin formation but is
similar in potency to diflubenzuron. Therefore, assuming equal toxicity
of CPU and PCA to diflubenzuron is health protective, additional
toxicity studies are not required.
ii. There are no clear signs of neurotoxicity following subchronic
or chronic dosing in multiple species in the diflubenzuron database;
therefore, there is no need for any neurotoxicity studies.
iii. There is no evidence that diflubenzuron 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. The dietary exposure assessment uses conservative assumptions
which will not underestimate dietary exposure and EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to diflubenzuron in drinking water. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
diflubenzuron.
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
aPAD and 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,
diflubenzuron 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
diflubenzuron from food and water will utilize 37% of the cPAD for
children 1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for diflubenzuron.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). A short-term
adverse effect was identified; however, diflubenzuron is not registered
for any use patterns that would result in short-term residential
exposure; therefore, no further assessment of short-term risk is
necessary.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
diflubenzuron is not registered for any use patterns that would result
in intermediate-term residential exposure; therefore, no further
assessment of intermediate-term risk is necessary.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, diflubenzuron is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
However, metabolites CPU and PCA are considered probable carcinogens
and have Q*s assigned to them. Individual cancer dietary exposure
analyses were conducted for each metabolite. The cancer assessment for
PCA includes food only (not present in drinking water). The cancer
assessment for CPU includes milk and water only. For PCA, the cancer
dietary exposure estimate for the U.S. population is 1 x
10-\6\. For CPU, the cancer dietary exposure estimate for
the U.S. population is 3 x 10-\6\.
EPA generally considers cancer risks in the range of
10-\6\ or less to be negligible. The precision which can be
assumed for cancer risk estimates is best described by rounding to the
nearest integral order of magnitude on the log scale; for example,
risks falling between 3 x 10\-7\ and 3 x 10-\6\ are
expressed as risks in the range of 10-\6\. Considering the
precision with which cancer hazard can be estimated, the
conservativeness of low-dose linear
[[Page 5299]]
extrapolation, and the rounding procedure described above, cancer risk
should generally not be assumed to exceed the benchmark level of
concern of the range of 10-\6\ until the calculated risk
exceeds approximately 3 x 10-\6\. This is particularly the
case where some conservatism is maintained in the exposure assessment.
Although the PCA and CPU exposure risk assessment are refined, they
retain significant conservatism in that residues in food were estimated
at \1/2\ LOQ even though no residues were detected in field trials and
feeding studies, and for some commodities EPA assumed 100 PCT.
Accordingly, EPA has concluded the cancer risk for all existing
diflubenzuron uses, and the uses associated with the tolerances
established in this action fall within the range of 1 x
10-\6\ and are thus negligible.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to diflubenzuron residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (gas chromatography/electron
capture detection (ECD) and high-performance liquid chromatography/
ultraviolet (HPLC/UV)) is available to enforce the tolerance
expression.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has established MRLs for diflubenzuron, expressed in
terms of diflubenzuron per se, for many including: Citrus, fruits 0.5
ppm. This MRL is different than the citrus crop group tolerance being
established for diflubenzuron in this action.
Numerical compatibility with Codex is not possible as the good
agricultural practices used for the Codex MRL are different from the
proposed use pattern in the U.S. Additionally, the tolerance expression
for the Codex MRL and the U.S. tolerance are not the same, only the
U.S. tolerance contains the CPU and PCA metabolites. EPA is re-
examining whether it can harmonize the U.S. tolerance expression with
the Codex MRL, but making this change alone would not harmonize the
numerical difference.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
EPA is revising the tolerance expression to clarify that, as
provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), the tolerance covers metabolites
and degradates of diflubenzuron not specifically mentioned; and that
compliance with the specified tolerance levels is to be determined by
measuring only the specific compounds mentioned in the tolerance
expression. Therefore, the tolerance expression for diflubenzuron will
be revised under 40 CFR 180.377 (a)(1), (a)(2), and (b) (see the
regulatory text of this document).
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
diflubenzuron, (N-[[(4-chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6-
difluorobenzimide) in or on fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 3.0 ppm; and
citrus, oil at 32 ppm. The Agency is removing the currently established
tolerances for grapefruit, orange, pummel, and tangerine from 40 CFR
180.377. These tolerances are being replaced by the tolerance for
fruit, citrus, group 10-10.
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
[[Page 5300]]
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 17, 2014.
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. 180.377:
0
a. Revise the introductory text in paragraph (a)(1).
0
b. Remove ``Grapefruit'', ``Orange sweet'', and ``Tangerine'' from the
table in paragraph (a)(1).
0
c. Revise the introductory text in paragraph (a)(2).
0
d. Remove ``Pummelo'', from the table in paragraph (a)(2).
0
e. Add Citrus, oil, and Fruit, citrus, group 10-10 to the table in
paragraph (a)(2).
0
f. Revise the introductory text in paragraph (b).
The amendments read as follows:
Sec. 180.377 Diflubenzuron; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of
diflubenzuron, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by measuring only diflubenzuron (N-
[[(4-chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6-difluorobenzamide).
* * * * *
(2) Tolerances are established for residues of the insecticide
diflubenzuron (N-[[(4-chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6-
difluorobenzamide), in or on the commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below is to be
determined by measuring only the sum of diflubenzuron (N-[[(4-
chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6-difluorobenzamide), 4-
chlorophenylyurea and 4-chloroaniline, calculated as the stoichiometric
equivalent of diflubenzuron, in or on the commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Citrus, oil................................................. 32
* * * * *
Fruit, citrus, group 10-10.................................. 3.0
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. Time-limited tolerances are
established for residues of the insecticide diflubenzuron (N-[[(4-
chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6- difluorobenzamide) and its
metabolites, in connection with use of the pesticide under section 18
emergency exemptions granted by EPA. Compliance with the tolerance
levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only the sum of
diflubenzuron (N-[[(4-chlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-2,6-
difluorobenzamide), 4-chlorophenylyurea and 4-chloroaniline, calculated
as the stoichiometric equivalent of diflubenzuron, in or on the
commodity. The tolerances are specified in the following table, and
will expire and are revoked on the dates specified.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-02064 Filed 1-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P