Fenoxaprop-ethyl; Pesticide Tolerances, 26158-26164 [2014-10214]
Download as PDF
26158
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
There are no Codex, Canadian or
Mexican MRLs for tebuconazole in/or
on orange, oil and orange, juice.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
Based on the analysis of orange
processing data, EPA lowered the
tolerance level for orange, oil to 10 ppm.
Tolerances for orange, juice were
unnecessary since the raw agricultural
commodity tolerance of 1ppm covers
the proposed juice tolerance.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of tebuconazole, in or on
orange, oil at 10 ppm and orange, juice
at 1.0 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:20 May 06, 2014
Jkt 232001
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: April 28, 2014.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.474, in the table in
paragraph (a)(1), add alphabetically
entries for ‘‘Orange 1’’ and ‘‘Orange,
oil 1’’ and revise footnote 1 to read as
follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
§ 180.474 Tebuconazole; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Orange 1 ....................................
Orange, oil 1 ..............................
*
*
1There
*
*
*
*
1.0
10
*
are no U.S. registrations.
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2014–10216 Filed 5–6–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0588; FRL–9909–72]
Fenoxaprop-ethyl; Pesticide
Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes a
tolerance for residues of fenoxapropethyl (FE), in or on grass hay.
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4) requested this tolerance under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective May
7, 2014. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
July 7, 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).
SUMMARY:
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0588, 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.
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2012–0588 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 July 7, 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:20 May 06, 2014
Jkt 232001
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–
2012–0588, 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
28, 2012 (77 FR 59578) (FRL–9364–6),
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 2E8051) by IR–4,
500 College Road East, Suite 201W.,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.430 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the herbicide fenoxapropethyl, [(±)-ethyl 2-[4- [(6-chloro-2benzoxazolyl)oxy]phenoxy]propanoate]
and its metabolites 2-[4-[(6:-chloro-2benzoxazolyl) oxy]phenoxy] propanoic
acid and 6-chloro-2,3dihydrobenzoxazol-2-one, each
expressed as the parent compound, in or
on grass, hay at 0.15 part per million
(ppm). Based on the regional residue
data submitted from Washington and
Oregon, and the petitioner’s intent for
this to be a regional pesticide tolerance,
the tolerance is being established as a
‘‘Tolerance with regional registration’’
with use restricted to Oregon,
Washington, and Utah. That document
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Bayer CropScience, the
registrant, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments were received on the
notice of filing. EPA response to those
comments is discussed in Unit IV.C.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the level at which the
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
26159
tolerance is being established. The
reason for this change is explained in
Unit IV.D.
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 fenoxaprop-pethyl (FPE) including exposure resulting
from the tolerances established by this
action. EPA’s assessment of exposures
and risks associated with FPE 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.
FPE is an enriched isomer
formulation (95% d and 5% l
enantiomers) based on the previously
registered product FE which is a 50:50
racemic mixture of d and l enantiomers.
FE is no longer a registered active
ingredient. The toxicology database for
FPE is complete based on studies
submitted for both FPE and FE. Based
on the analysis of the submitted studies,
EPA found that the toxicological effects
of FE and FPE across species, duration,
and route of exposure are similar. Most
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
26160
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
of the toxicological data available
involved testing of the FE, not FPE.
However, EPA has concluded that the
similarity between the FE and FPE data
is such that the database for FE could be
bridged with FPE.
The major target organs following
short-term and long-term oral
administration of FE and FPE in rats
and mice are the liver and kidneys, with
rats being the most sensitive species.
The primary toxic effect is altered lipid
metabolism characterized by decreased
lipids and cholesterol, and increased
liver weights in rats, and slightly
increased lipids, cholesterol, proteins,
and liver weights in mice. Additionally,
increased enzyme activity (aspartate
amino transferase (ASAT), alanine
amino transferase (ALAT), and alkaline
phosphatase (ALP)), hypertrophy, and
single cell necrosis were observed in
mice. In the kidneys, increases in
ketones and kidney weights were
observed in rats and evidence of
proximal renal tubular injury were
observed in mice following 90-day
administration of FPE. However, no
effects on the kidneys were observed
following chronic administration of FE
to rats, mice, or dogs. In both species,
males were slightly more sensitive to
the liver effects of FE and FPE. It is also
important to note that no increases in
toxicity are observed over time for FE
when comparing the 28-day and 90-day
subchronic studies, the 2-generation
reproductive toxicity study, and the 2year chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity
study in rats, or in FPE when comparing
the 28-day and 90-day subchronic
toxicity studies in rats.
FPE has low acute toxicity following
the oral, dermal, and inhalation routes
of exposure. No evidence of
immunotoxicity, reproductive or
neurological toxicity was identified in
the database. Developmental toxicity
occurred in rats as evidenced by skeletal
anomalies (longitudinally displaced,
fragmented, fused, dysplastic sternebrae
or dislocated sternebrae) and skeletal
retardations (weak or non-ossification of
one or several cranial bones).
Developmental effects only occurred in
the rat in the presence of maternal
toxicity (decreased body weight, body
weight gain, and heart weight). No
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:20 May 06, 2014
Jkt 232001
developmental effects were identified in
rabbits. In mice, a treatment-related
increase in tumor incidence of
hepatocellular adenomas and
carcinomas, mainly adenomas, was
observed in males at 320 ppm (30%)
compared to the control (2%). In
addition, microscopic pathology
indicated that hepatocellular
hypertrophy was observed in the
majority of treated animals (both sexes).
There was, however, no evidence of a
mutagenic effect in a comprehensive
battery of genetic toxicology assays with
both isomers. No evidence of tumors
was identified in rats.
The only tumor response induced by
FE/FPE occurred in the liver of male
mice; no liver tumors were seen in the
female mice or in the guideline chronic/
carcinogenicity study in male and
female rats. The tumors were benign
with no progression to malignancy.
Mutagenicity has been ruled out as a
mode of action (MOA) for this response.
The presence of a single non-mutagenic
tumor type in one sex and species—
here, benign liver tumors in the male
mouse, a common tumor in mice—
provides no more than a weak
suggestion of possible carcinogenic
effects and thus does not support a
linear assessment of risk based on the
tumor incidence. Given the doses at
which the benign mouse tumors were
seen, EPA concludes that the chronic
reference dose (cRfD) for FPE will
adequately protect for all chronic
toxicity, including carcinogenicity, that
could result from exposure to FE/FPE.
The Agency has waived the
requirements for acute and subchronic
neurotoxicity studies based on the
following rationale:
1. The lack of neurotoxicity in the
available toxicology database for FE and
FPE.
2. The target organs of FPE and FE are
the kidney and liver, and the
mechanism of action for FPE and the
chemical class do not target the nervous
system.
3. Developmental effects and
decreased total blood lipids/cholesterol
are the most sensitive effects seen in the
FE database and provide the most
sensitive POD for risk assessment.
4. There is low concern for
neurotoxicity in other members of this
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
class of chemicals (i.e., the arloxy
phenoxy-propionate class).
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by FPE as well as the noobserved-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL)
and the lowest-observed-adverse-effectlevel (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies
can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in the document
titled ‘‘Fenoxaprop-p-ethyl. Registration
Review Preliminary Risk Assessment
and Proposed New Use on Grass Grown
for Seed’’ on pages 52–57 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0588.
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 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 FPE used for human risk
assessment is shown in Table 1 of this
unit.
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
26161
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR FPE FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Exposure/scenario
Acute dietary (general population including infants and
children and females 13–50
years of age).
POD and
uncertainty/safety
factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk
assessment
Study and toxicological effects
No appropriate endpoint attributable to a single dose was identified. An acute RfD was not established.
Chronic dietary (all populations)
NOAEL = 1.5 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10x ................
UFH = 10x ................
FQPA SF = 1x .........
Chronic RfD = 0.015
mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.015 mg/
kg/day.
Chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity (rat) 2-generation reproductive
toxicity (rat).
LOAEL = 9 mg/kg/day, based on decreased serum lipids and
cholesterol, and altered liver weights.
Incidental oral short-term ..........
(1 to 30 days) ............................
NOAEL = 6 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10x ................
UFH = 10x ................
FQPA SF = 1x .........
LOC for MOE = 100
28-day oral toxicity (rat).
LOAEL = 26 mg/kg/day, based on altered lipid metabolism (decreased HDL-cholesterol, HDL-phospholipids, and total lipids,
increased triglycerides, and ketonuria) and increased liver
and kidney weights.
Dermal short-term (1 to 30
days) and intermediate-term
(1 to 6 months).
Dermal study
NOAEL = 20 mg/
kg/day.
UFA = 10x ................
UFH = 10x ................
FQPA SF = 1x .........
LOC for MOE = 100
28-day dermal toxicity (rat).
LOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day, based on non-regenerative anemia,
decreased serum cholesterol, total lipids, and protein (beta 1
globulins), and increased liver and kidney weights were observed. Additionally, cholesterol remained decreased following a 15-day recovery period.
Inhalation short-term (1–30
days) and intermediate-term
(1–6 months).
Inhalation study.
NOAEL = 0.07
mg/L (males) 0.3
mg/L (females).
UFA = 3x ..................
UFH = 10x ................
FQPA SF = 1x .........
LOC for MOE = 30 ..
21-day inhalation toxicity (rat).
LOAEL = 0.3 mg/L (males only) Based on slight normocytic
anemia, decreases in serum cholesterol and total lipids, and
increases in liver weight and urea nitrogen.
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation).
Quantification of risk using a non-linear approach; i.e., RfD, for FPE will adequately account for all chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity, that could result from exposure to FPE.
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day =
milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c =
chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in
sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to FPE, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing FE
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.430. EPA
assessed dietary exposures from FPE
and FE 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 FPE; therefore,
a quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the United States Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA’s) National Health
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:20 May 06, 2014
Jkt 232001
and Nutrition Examination Survey,
What We Eat in America, (NHANES/
WWEIA). As to residue levels in food,
EPA use an unrefined analysis based on
tolerance-level residues, 100 percent
crop treated (PCT) assumptions, and
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
(DEEM) default processing factors.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that a nonlinear RfD
approach is appropriate for assessing
cancer risk to FPE. Cancer risk was
assessed using the same exposure
estimates as discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue or PCT information
in the dietary assessment for FPE or FE.
Tolerance level residues and 100 PCT
were assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency has identified FPE
and its three degradates, fenoxaprop-p
acid ((D+)-2-[4-(6-chloro-2benzoxazolyloxy) phenoxy] propanoate,
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
AE F088406), chlorobenzoxazolone (4(6-chloro-2-benzoxazolyloxy) phenol,
AE F054014), and 4-(6-chloro-2benzoxazolyloxy) phenol (AE F040356),
as residues of concern in drinking
water. The parent plus the three
degradates were assessed using a total
toxic residue (TTR) approach.
The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for FPE and its three degradates in
drinking water. These simulation
models take into account data on the
physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of FPE and its three
degradates. 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 Tier 1 Rice Model and
Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground
Water (PRZM GW), the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)
of FPE and its degradates (TTR) for
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
26162
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
chronic exposure assessments are
estimated to be 68.6 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 0.032 ppb
for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration of value 68.6 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). FPE is
currently registered for the following
uses that could result in residential
exposures: Residential turf and home
garden. EPA assessed residential
exposure using the following
assumptions: For residential handlers,
both short-term dermal and short-term
inhalation exposure is expected as a
result of applying FPE to ornamentals
and turf.
There is the potential for short-term
dermal and incidental short-term oral
post-application exposure for
individuals exposed as a result of being
in an environment that has been
previously treated with FPE. The
quantitative exposure/risk assessment
for residential post-application
exposures is based on the following
scenarios:
• Adults High Contact Lawn Activities
• Children 1 to <2 years old High
Contact Lawn Activities
• Adults Mowing Turf
• Children 11 to <16 years old Mowing
Turf
• Adults Ornamental Garden Activities
• Children 6 to <11 years old
Ornamental Garden Activities
The most conservative residential
exposure scenario for adults reflects
dermal exposure from post-application
exposure to turf and gardens. The most
conservative residential exposure for
children reflects dermal and hand-tomouth exposures from post-application
high contact lawn activity exposure
from turf applications.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:20 May 06, 2014
Jkt 232001
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found FPE to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and FPE does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has assumed that FPE
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 available data do not provide
evidence of any increased susceptibility
in the offspring in either of the two
developmental toxicity studies for FPE
or in the 2-generation reproduction
study for FE. Delayed ossification was
the primary effect in the developmental
toxicity study and only occurred in the
presence of maternal toxicity and a
clearly defined NOAEL and LOAEL
were achieved.
In the rat developmental toxicity
study with FPE, longitudinally
displaced, fragmented, fused, dysplastic
sternebrae or dislocated sternebrae and
weak or non-ossification of one or
several cranial bones were noted at 100
mg/kg (highest dose tested). These
incidences occurred only in the
presence of maternal toxicity (decreased
gestational body weights, body weight
gains, and food consumption). No
developmental effects occurred in
rabbits. In the 2-generation rat
reproductive toxicity study on FE, no
reproductive or developmental effects
were observed. An increase in ALP
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
activity and liver weights were
identified in the offspring at 9.0 mg/kg.
These effects occurred in the presence
of parental toxicity (increased liver
weight and decreased lipids) and are
consistent with hepatotoxicity, the
primary toxic effect of FPE, observed
across the database.
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 FPE is
complete.
ii. There is no indication that FPE is
a neurotoxic chemical and there is no
need for a developmental neurotoxicity
study or additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that FPE
results in increased susceptibility in in
utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats
in the 2-generation reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100 PCT and
tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to FPE in
drinking water. EPA used similarly
conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure of children as well
as incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by FPE.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account acute
exposure estimates from dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, FPE is not expected
to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to FPE and FE
from food and water will utilize 28% of
the cPAD for all infants less than 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 FPE
is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
FPE 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 FPE.
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
worst case MOEs of 249 for adults and
302 for children. Because EPA’s level of
concern for FPE is a MOE of 100 or
below, these MOEs are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect
was identified; however, FPE is not
registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on intermediateterm residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure
and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for
FPE.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. EPA considers the chronic
aggregate risk assessment to be
protective of any aggregate cancer risk.
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 FPE and FE
residues.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:20 May 06, 2014
Jkt 232001
26163
IV. Other Considerations
V. Conclusion
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(gas chromatography with electron
capture detection (GD–ECD) method,
based on Hoechst HRAV Analytical
Method HRAV–4B) is available to
enforce the tolerance expression.
Therefore, a tolerance with regional
registration is established for residues of
fenoxaprop-ethyl, [(±)-ethyl 2-[4- [(6chloro-2benzoxazolyl)oxy]phenoxy]propanoate]
and its metabolites 2-[4-[(6:-chloro-2benzoxazolyl) oxy]phenoxy] propanoic
acid and 6-chloro-2,3dihydrobenzoxazol-2-one, each
expressed as the parent compound, in or
on grass, hay at 0.09 ppm.
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 FPE in or on grass hay.
C. Response to Comments
Two comments that were received
were not related to FPE and therefore,
do not need to be addressed here. A
third comment was received stating that
FPE is an endocrine disruptor and
America does not need any more of
those. In the available toxicity studies
on FPE, there was no estrogen,
androgen, and/or thyroid mediated
toxicity. The Agency currently has no
evidence that FPE is an endocrine
disruptor.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
EPA has modified the tolerance from
the proposed level of 0.15 ppm to 0.09
ppm for the following reason: The
method used for data-collection (as well
as tolerance enforcement) converts the
residues of concern for FPE to acyl 6chlorobenzoxazolone for detection. It is
necessary to then convert this residue
value to parent equivalents. Since the
residues found on grass, hay were less
than the limit of quantitation (LOQ) of
0.05 ppm for acyl 6chlorobenzoxazolone, EPA multiplied
this 0.05 ppm value by the ratio of the
molecular weights (1.71) to arrive at a
recommended tolerance of 0.09 ppm.
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
26164
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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: April 29, 2014.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.430, revise paragraph (c) to
read as follows:
■
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 180.430 Fenoxaprop-ethyl; tolerances for
residues.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. Tolerances with regional
registration, as defined in § 180.1(l), are
established for residues of the herbicide
fenoxaprop-ethyl, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table in this
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:31 May 06, 2014
Jkt 232001
application fees at such rates as the
Commission shall establish or at such
modified rates as it shall establish
pursuant to’’ section 8(b). Section 8
contains the Schedule of Charges for a
broad range of application categories as
well as procedures for modifying and
collecting these charges. The
Commission began assessing such
application fees in 1987, and, as
required by section 8(b), it began
reviewing the fees every two years
beginning after October 1, 1991 to make
adjustments to reflect changes in the
Consumer Price Index. As required by
section 8(e) of the Act, collected fees are
Parts per
Commodity
deposited in the general fund of the
million
United States Treasury. As required by
Grass, hay ............................
0.09 the statute and consistent with our prior
practice, this Order increases
*
*
*
*
*
application fees to reflect the net change
[FR Doc. 2014–10214 Filed 5–6–14; 8:45 am]
in the Consumer Price Index for all
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Urban Consumers (‘‘CPI–U’’) of 8
percent, calculated from October 2009
to October 2013.1 The adjustments made
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
to the fee schedule comport with the
COMMISSION
statutory formula set forth in section
8(b).
47 CFR Part 1
2. The Commission will send a copy
[GEN Docket No. 86–285; FCC 14–24]
of this Order in a report to be sent to
Congress and the Government
Schedule of Application Fees
Accountability Office pursuant to the
AGENCY: Federal Communications
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C.
Commission.
801(a)(1)(A).
ACTION: Final rule.
3. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, that,
SUMMARY: In this document, the
pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), and 8
Commission amends its rules to revise
of the Communications Act of 1934, as
its Schedule of Application Fees per
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j),
section 8(b)(1) of the Communications
and 158, the rule changes specified
Act of 1934. The Commission is
herein ARE ADOPTED and the
required to revise its application fee
Schedule of Application Fees, 47 CFR
rates every two years based on changes
1.1102 et seq., IS AMENDED as set forth
in the Consumer Price Index. For FY
in the attached Appendices.
2014, calculated from October 2009 and
4. It is further ordered that the rule
October 2013, the Consumer Price Index
changes and amendment to the
for all Urban Consumers (‘‘CPI–U’’)
Schedule of Application Fees made
increased 8 percent. The Schedule of
herein shall become effective 30 days
Application Fees reflects revised fee
after date of publication in the Federal
rates based on a CPI–U rate increase of
Register.
8 percent.
DATES: Effective June 6, 2014.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 1
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Administrative practice and
Roland Helvajian, Office of Managing
Director at (202) 418–0444.
procedure.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. By this Order, adopted March 24,
1 Application fees are calculated based upon the
2014 and released March 25, 2014, the
Commission makes rule changes to part process set forth in 47 CFR 1.1115. The increase in
the CPI–U between October 2009 (the month used
1 of the Commission’s rules, and
to calculate the last CPI–U adjustment of the
amends its Schedule of Application
Schedule of Application Fees) and October 2013 is
Fees, 47 CFR 1.1102 et seq. to adjust its
17.369 index points, or 8 percent. However, the
actual calculation in fees is based on index points
fees for processing applications and
that are averaged over a time period beginning in
other filings. Section 8(a) of the
December 1989. See Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI–
Communications Act of 1934, as
U Index, http:/www.bls.gov/cpi/cpid1402.pdf
amended (‘‘the Act’’), requires the
(showing a CPI–U Index of 216.177 for October
Commission to ‘‘assess and collect
2009 and 233.546 for October 2013).
paragraph when fenoxaprop-ethyl is
used in the states of Oregon,
Washington, and Utah. Compliance
with the tolerance levels specified in
this paragraph is to be determined by
measuring only the sum of fenoxapropethyl, (±)-ethyl 2-[4-[(6-chloro-2benzoxazolyl)oxy]phenoxy]propanoate,
and its metabolites, 2-[4-[(6-chloro-2benzoxazolyl)oxy]phenoxy]propanoic
acid and 6-chloro-2,3dihydrobenzoxazol-2-one, calculated as
the stoichiometric equivalent of
fenoxaprop-ethyl, in or on the
commodity
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07MYR1.SGM
07MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 88 (Wednesday, May 7, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26158-26164]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10214]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0588; FRL-9909-72]
Fenoxaprop-ethyl; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of
fenoxaprop-ethyl (FE), in or on grass hay. Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested this tolerance under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective May 7, 2014. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before July 7, 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-2012-0588, 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.
[[Page 26159]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois Rossi, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-7090; email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0588 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
July 7, 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-2012-0588, 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 28, 2012 (77 FR 59578) (FRL-
9364-6), 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
2E8051) by IR-4, 500 College Road East, Suite 201W., Princeton, NJ
08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.430 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide fenoxaprop-ethyl,
[()-ethyl 2-[4- [(6-chloro-2-
benzoxazolyl)oxy]phenoxy]propanoate] and its metabolites 2-[4-[(6:-
chloro-2-benzoxazolyl) oxy]phenoxy] propanoic acid and 6-chloro-2,3-
dihydrobenzoxazol-2-one, each expressed as the parent compound, in or
on grass, hay at 0.15 part per million (ppm). Based on the regional
residue data submitted from Washington and Oregon, and the petitioner's
intent for this to be a regional pesticide tolerance, the tolerance is
being established as a ``Tolerance with regional registration'' with
use restricted to Oregon, Washington, and Utah. That document
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Bayer CropScience, the
registrant, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments were received on the notice of filing. EPA response to
those comments is discussed in Unit IV.C.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the level at which the tolerance is being established. The
reason for this change is explained in Unit IV.D.
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 fenoxaprop-p-ethyl (FPE)
including exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this
action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with FPE
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.
FPE is an enriched isomer formulation (95% d and 5% l enantiomers)
based on the previously registered product FE which is a 50:50 racemic
mixture of d and l enantiomers. FE is no longer a registered active
ingredient. The toxicology database for FPE is complete based on
studies submitted for both FPE and FE. Based on the analysis of the
submitted studies, EPA found that the toxicological effects of FE and
FPE across species, duration, and route of exposure are similar. Most
[[Page 26160]]
of the toxicological data available involved testing of the FE, not
FPE. However, EPA has concluded that the similarity between the FE and
FPE data is such that the database for FE could be bridged with FPE.
The major target organs following short-term and long-term oral
administration of FE and FPE in rats and mice are the liver and
kidneys, with rats being the most sensitive species. The primary toxic
effect is altered lipid metabolism characterized by decreased lipids
and cholesterol, and increased liver weights in rats, and slightly
increased lipids, cholesterol, proteins, and liver weights in mice.
Additionally, increased enzyme activity (aspartate amino transferase
(ASAT), alanine amino transferase (ALAT), and alkaline phosphatase
(ALP)), hypertrophy, and single cell necrosis were observed in mice. In
the kidneys, increases in ketones and kidney weights were observed in
rats and evidence of proximal renal tubular injury were observed in
mice following 90-day administration of FPE. However, no effects on the
kidneys were observed following chronic administration of FE to rats,
mice, or dogs. In both species, males were slightly more sensitive to
the liver effects of FE and FPE. It is also important to note that no
increases in toxicity are observed over time for FE when comparing the
28-day and 90-day subchronic studies, the 2-generation reproductive
toxicity study, and the 2-year chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study
in rats, or in FPE when comparing the 28-day and 90-day subchronic
toxicity studies in rats.
FPE has low acute toxicity following the oral, dermal, and
inhalation routes of exposure. No evidence of immunotoxicity,
reproductive or neurological toxicity was identified in the database.
Developmental toxicity occurred in rats as evidenced by skeletal
anomalies (longitudinally displaced, fragmented, fused, dysplastic
sternebrae or dislocated sternebrae) and skeletal retardations (weak or
non-ossification of one or several cranial bones). Developmental
effects only occurred in the rat in the presence of maternal toxicity
(decreased body weight, body weight gain, and heart weight). No
developmental effects were identified in rabbits. In mice, a treatment-
related increase in tumor incidence of hepatocellular adenomas and
carcinomas, mainly adenomas, was observed in males at 320 ppm (30%)
compared to the control (2%). In addition, microscopic pathology
indicated that hepatocellular hypertrophy was observed in the majority
of treated animals (both sexes). There was, however, no evidence of a
mutagenic effect in a comprehensive battery of genetic toxicology
assays with both isomers. No evidence of tumors was identified in rats.
The only tumor response induced by FE/FPE occurred in the liver of
male mice; no liver tumors were seen in the female mice or in the
guideline chronic/carcinogenicity study in male and female rats. The
tumors were benign with no progression to malignancy. Mutagenicity has
been ruled out as a mode of action (MOA) for this response. The
presence of a single non-mutagenic tumor type in one sex and species--
here, benign liver tumors in the male mouse, a common tumor in mice--
provides no more than a weak suggestion of possible carcinogenic
effects and thus does not support a linear assessment of risk based on
the tumor incidence. Given the doses at which the benign mouse tumors
were seen, EPA concludes that the chronic reference dose (cRfD) for FPE
will adequately protect for all chronic toxicity, including
carcinogenicity, that could result from exposure to FE/FPE.
The Agency has waived the requirements for acute and subchronic
neurotoxicity studies based on the following rationale:
1. The lack of neurotoxicity in the available toxicology database
for FE and FPE.
2. The target organs of FPE and FE are the kidney and liver, and
the mechanism of action for FPE and the chemical class do not target
the nervous system.
3. Developmental effects and decreased total blood lipids/
cholesterol are the most sensitive effects seen in the FE database and
provide the most sensitive POD for risk assessment.
4. There is low concern for neurotoxicity in other members of this
class of chemicals (i.e., the arloxy phenoxy-propionate class).
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by FPE 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 the document titled ``Fenoxaprop-p-ethyl.
Registration Review Preliminary Risk Assessment and Proposed New Use on
Grass Grown for Seed'' on pages 52-57 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2012-0588.
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 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 FPE used for human
risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
[[Page 26161]]
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for FPE for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
POD and uncertainty/ RfD, PAD, LOC for
Exposure/scenario safety factors risk assessment Study and toxicological effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (general population No appropriate endpoint attributable to a single dose was identified. An
including infants and children acute RfD was not established.
and females 13-50 years of age).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (all populations) NOAEL = 1.5 mg/kg/ Chronic RfD = 0.015 Chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity
day. mg/kg/day. (rat) 2-generation reproductive
UFA = 10x........... cPAD = 0.015 mg/kg/ toxicity (rat).
UFH = 10x........... day. LOAEL = 9 mg/kg/day, based on
FQPA SF = 1x........ decreased serum lipids and
cholesterol, and altered liver
weights.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidental oral short-term....... NOAEL = 6 mg/kg/day. LOC for MOE = 100.. 28-day oral toxicity (rat).
(1 to 30 days)................... UFA = 10x........... LOAEL = 26 mg/kg/day, based on
UFH = 10x........... altered lipid metabolism
FQPA SF = 1x........ (decreased HDL-cholesterol, HDL-
phospholipids, and total lipids,
increased triglycerides, and
ketonuria) and increased liver
and kidney weights.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days) Dermal study NOAEL = LOC for MOE = 100.. 28-day dermal toxicity (rat).
and intermediate-term (1 to 6 20 mg/kg/day. LOAEL = 100 mg/kg/day, based on
months). UFA = 10x........... non-regenerative anemia,
UFH = 10x........... decreased serum cholesterol,
FQPA SF = 1x........ total lipids, and protein (beta 1
globulins), and increased liver
and kidney weights were observed.
Additionally, cholesterol
remained decreased following a 15-
day recovery period.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inhalation short-term (1-30 days) Inhalation study. LOC for MOE = 30... 21-day inhalation toxicity (rat).
and intermediate-term (1-6 NOAEL = 0.07 mg/L LOAEL = 0.3 mg/L (males only)
months). (males) 0.3 mg/L Based on slight normocytic
(females). anemia, decreases in serum
UFA = 3x............ cholesterol and total lipids, and
UFH = 10x........... increases in liver weight and
FQPA SF = 1x........ urea nitrogen.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation) Quantification of risk using a non-linear approach; i.e., RfD, for FPE will
adequately account for all chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity, that
could result from exposure to FPE.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level
of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-
level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor.
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among
members of the human population (intraspecies).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to FPE, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing FE tolerances in 40 CFR 180.430. EPA
assessed dietary exposures from FPE and FE 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
FPE; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is
unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the United States
Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA use an unrefined analysis based on
tolerance-level residues, 100 percent crop treated (PCT) assumptions,
and Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM) default processing
factors.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that a nonlinear RfD approach is appropriate for assessing
cancer risk to FPE. Cancer risk was assessed using the same exposure
estimates as discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary assessment for
FPE or FE. Tolerance level residues and 100 PCT were assumed for all
food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency has identified
FPE and its three degradates, fenoxaprop-p acid ((D+)-2-[4-(6-chloro-2-
benzoxazolyloxy) phenoxy] propanoate, AE F088406), chlorobenzoxazolone
(4-(6-chloro-2-benzoxazolyloxy) phenol, AE F054014), and 4-(6-chloro-2-
benzoxazolyloxy) phenol (AE F040356), as residues of concern in
drinking water. The parent plus the three degradates were assessed
using a total toxic residue (TTR) approach.
The Agency used screening level water exposure models in the
dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for FPE and its three
degradates in drinking water. These simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of
FPE and its three degradates. 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 Tier 1 Rice Model and Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground
Water (PRZM GW), the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
FPE and its degradates (TTR) for
[[Page 26162]]
chronic exposure assessments are estimated to be 68.6 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 0.032 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 68.6 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). FPE is currently
registered for the following uses that could result in residential
exposures: Residential turf and home garden. EPA assessed residential
exposure using the following assumptions: For residential handlers,
both short-term dermal and short-term inhalation exposure is expected
as a result of applying FPE to ornamentals and turf.
There is the potential for short-term dermal and incidental short-
term oral post-application exposure for individuals exposed as a result
of being in an environment that has been previously treated with FPE.
The quantitative exposure/risk assessment for residential post-
application exposures is based on the following scenarios:
Adults High Contact Lawn Activities
Children 1 to <2 years old High Contact Lawn Activities
Adults Mowing Turf
Children 11 to <16 years old Mowing Turf
Adults Ornamental Garden Activities
Children 6 to <11 years old Ornamental Garden Activities
The most conservative residential exposure scenario for adults
reflects dermal exposure from post-application exposure to turf and
gardens. The most conservative residential exposure for children
reflects dermal and hand-to-mouth exposures from post-application high
contact lawn activity exposure from turf applications.
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 FPE to share a common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and FPE does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that FPE 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 available data do not
provide evidence of any increased susceptibility in the offspring in
either of the two developmental toxicity studies for FPE or in the 2-
generation reproduction study for FE. Delayed ossification was the
primary effect in the developmental toxicity study and only occurred in
the presence of maternal toxicity and a clearly defined NOAEL and LOAEL
were achieved.
In the rat developmental toxicity study with FPE, longitudinally
displaced, fragmented, fused, dysplastic sternebrae or dislocated
sternebrae and weak or non-ossification of one or several cranial bones
were noted at 100 mg/kg (highest dose tested). These incidences
occurred only in the presence of maternal toxicity (decreased
gestational body weights, body weight gains, and food consumption). No
developmental effects occurred in rabbits. In the 2-generation rat
reproductive toxicity study on FE, no reproductive or developmental
effects were observed. An increase in ALP activity and liver weights
were identified in the offspring at 9.0 mg/kg. These effects occurred
in the presence of parental toxicity (increased liver weight and
decreased lipids) and are consistent with hepatotoxicity, the primary
toxic effect of FPE, observed across the database.
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 FPE is complete.
ii. There is no indication that FPE is a neurotoxic chemical and
there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional
UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that FPE results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to FPE in drinking water. EPA used similarly
conservative assumptions to assess post-application exposure of
children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by FPE.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
FPE is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for
[[Page 26163]]
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to FPE and FE
from food and water will utilize 28% of the cPAD for all infants less
than 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 FPE is not
expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
FPE 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 FPE.
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 worst case MOEs of 249
for adults and 302 for children. Because EPA's level of concern for FPE
is a MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however, FPE is
not registered for any use patterns that would result in intermediate-
term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is assessed based on
intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure.
Because there is no intermediate-term residential exposure and chronic
dietary exposure has already been assessed under the appropriately
protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment of intermediate-
term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk
assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for FPE.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. EPA considers the
chronic aggregate risk assessment to be protective of any aggregate
cancer risk.
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 FPE and FE residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (gas chromatography with electron
capture detection (GD-ECD) method, based on Hoechst HRAV Analytical
Method HRAV-4B) 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 not established a MRL for FPE in or on grass hay.
C. Response to Comments
Two comments that were received were not related to FPE and
therefore, do not need to be addressed here. A third comment was
received stating that FPE is an endocrine disruptor and America does
not need any more of those. In the available toxicity studies on FPE,
there was no estrogen, androgen, and/or thyroid mediated toxicity. The
Agency currently has no evidence that FPE is an endocrine disruptor.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
EPA has modified the tolerance from the proposed level of 0.15 ppm
to 0.09 ppm for the following reason: The method used for data-
collection (as well as tolerance enforcement) converts the residues of
concern for FPE to acyl 6-chlorobenzoxazolone for detection. It is
necessary to then convert this residue value to parent equivalents.
Since the residues found on grass, hay were less than the limit of
quantitation (LOQ) of 0.05 ppm for acyl 6-chlorobenzoxazolone, EPA
multiplied this 0.05 ppm value by the ratio of the molecular weights
(1.71) to arrive at a recommended tolerance of 0.09 ppm.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance with regional registration is established
for residues of fenoxaprop-ethyl, [()-ethyl 2-[4- [(6-
chloro-2-benzoxazolyl)oxy]phenoxy]propanoate] and its metabolites 2-[4-
[(6:-chloro-2-benzoxazolyl) oxy]phenoxy] propanoic acid and 6-chloro-
2,3-dihydrobenzoxazol-2-one, each expressed as the parent compound, in
or on grass, hay at 0.09 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
[[Page 26164]]
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: April 29, 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. 180.430, revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.430 Fenoxaprop-ethyl; tolerances for residues.
* * * * *
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. Tolerances with
regional registration, as defined in Sec. 180.1(l), are established
for residues of the herbicide fenoxaprop-ethyl, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in the table in
this paragraph when fenoxaprop-ethyl is used in the states of Oregon,
Washington, and Utah. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified in
this paragraph is to be determined by measuring only the sum of
fenoxaprop-ethyl, ()-ethyl 2-[4-[(6-chloro-2-
benzoxazolyl)oxy]phenoxy]propanoate, and its metabolites, 2-[4-[(6-
chloro-2-benzoxazolyl)oxy]phenoxy]propanoic acid and 6-chloro-2,3-
dihydrobenzoxazol-2-one, calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of
fenoxaprop-ethyl, in or on the commodity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grass, hay.............................................. 0.09
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-10214 Filed 5-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P