Kasugamycin; Pesticide Tolerances, 51492-51497 [2014-20502]
Download as PDF
51492
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 168 / Friday, August 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
11. Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have
tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have
a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes.
12. Energy Effects
13. Technical Standards
This proposed rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, we did
not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.
14. Environment
We have analyzed this proposed rule
under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01
and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination
that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. This proposed
rule establishes a temporary safety zone
to protect the public from fireworks
fallout. This rule is categorically
excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the
Commandant Instruction. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist
supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are
available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. We seek any
comments or information that may lead
to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this
proposed rule.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, and
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
15:18 Aug 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
40 CFR Part 180
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
Kasugamycin; Pesticide Tolerances
2. Add temporary § 165.T05–0723 to
read as follows:
SUMMARY:
■
■
§ 165.T05–0723 Safety Zone, Shallowbag
Bay; Manteo, NC.
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant energy action’’ under
Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
(a) Definitions. For the purposes of
this section, Captain of the Port means
the Commander, Sector North Carolina.
Representative means any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
who has been authorized to act on the
behalf of the Captain of the Port.
(b) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: This safety zone will
encompass all waters on Shallowbag
Bay within a 200 yard radius of a barge
anchor in position 35°54′31″ N,
longitude 075°39′42″ W. All geographic
coordinates are North American Datum
1983 (NAD 83).
(c) Regulations. (1) The general
regulations contained in § 165.23 of this
part apply to the area described in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(2) Persons or vessels requiring entry
into or passage through any portion of
the safety zone must first request
authorization from the Captain of the
Port, or a designated representative,
unless the Captain of the Port
previously announced via Marine Safety
Radio Broadcast on VHF Marine Band
Radio channel 22 (157.1 MHz) that this
regulation will not be enforced in that
portion of the safety zone. The Captain
of the Port can be contacted at telephone
number (910) 343–3882 or by radio on
VHF Marine Band Radio, channels 13
and 16.
(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast
Guard may be assisted in the patrol and
enforcement of the zone by Federal,
State, and local agencies.
(e) Enforcement period. This section
will be enforced from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m.
on September 26, 2014 unless cancelled
earlier by the Captain of the Port.
Dated: August 14, 2014.
S. R. Murtagh,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port North Carolina.
[FR Doc. 2014–20675 Filed 8–28–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0297; FRL–9911–57]
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes a
tolerance for residues of kasugamycin in
or on fruit, pome. Arysta LifeScience
North America, LLC (Arysta
LifeScience), requested a number of
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) which
are addressed in this document.
DATES: This regulation is effective
August 29, 2014. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before October 28, 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–2010–0297, 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), West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460–0001. The Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois
Rossi, Registration Division (7505P),
Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
(703) 305–7090; email address:
RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
E:\FR\FM\29AUR1.SGM
29AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 168 / Friday, August 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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).
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/
text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/
Title40/40tab_02.tpl. To access the
OCSPP test guidelines referenced in this
document electronically, please go to
https://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select
‘‘Test Methods and Guidelines.’’
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–2010–0297 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 October 28, 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–
2010–0297, 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/
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Aug 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
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 May 19,
2010 (75 FR 28009) (FRL–8823–2), EPA
issued a document pursuant to FFDCA
section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3),
announcing the filing of a pesticide
petition (PP 0F7689) by Arysta
LifeScience North America, LLC, 15401
Weston Parkway, Cary, NC 27513. The
petition requested that 40 CFR 180.614
be amended by establishing tolerances
for residues of the fungicide
kasugamycin, in or on fruiting
vegetables (crop group 8) at 0.15 parts
per million (ppm), pome fruit (crop
group 11) at 0.25 ppm, and walnuts at
0.04 ppm. That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by
Arysta LifeScience, the registrant, which
is available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the proposed tolerance levels
and the crops for which tolerances will
be established. The reasons for these
changes are explained in Unit IV.C. The
tolerance in imported fruiting
vegetables, crop group 8 is not being
removed or revised at this time. This
regulation additionally deletes the timelimited tolerance for apple, as the
tolerance will be superseded by
permanent tolerances in the various
pome fruits.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
51493
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 kasugamycin on
pome commodities, including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established
by this action. EPA’s assessment of
exposures and risks associated with
kasugamycin 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.
Kasugamycin is a member of the
aminoglycoside family of antibiotics,
which also includes streptomycin and
gentamicin. These agents inhibit
bacterial protein synthesis by binding to
the 30S subunit of the bacterial
ribosome. Their penetration through the
cell membrane of the bacterium
depends partly on oxygen-dependent
active transport by a polyamine carrier
system that seems to be absent in
mammalian systems.
Kasugamycin exhibits low acute
toxicity, being only a mild dermal and
ocular irritant. The major effects
observed across species in multipledose studies were decreased body
weights and body weight gains. The
primary target organs identified for
kasugamycin were the testes and kidney
in the rat and mouse. However, these
effects were only seen at higher dose
levels, generally at the highest dose
tested (HDT). In the combined chronic
toxicity/carcinogenicity study in rats,
the basis for the lowest-observedadverse-effect level (LOAEL) was an
increased incidence and severity of
testicular tubular atrophy, observed
during the histopathologic examinations
at the end of the 2-year dosing period,
as well as at 6 months, and 1 year.
Testicular degeneration and atrophy
E:\FR\FM\29AUR1.SGM
29AUR1
51494
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 168 / Friday, August 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
were observed in adult F1 males in the
rat reproductive toxicity study at the
highest dose. Testicular tubular
dilatation and degeneration were
observed in the mouse subchronic
study, but at a dose that exceeded the
limit dose; the mouse carcinogenicity
study tested at much lower doses, and
these effects were not observed. In the
dog chronic toxicity study, testicular
inflammation was reported at the high
dose, but was not accompanied by
atrophic or degenerative changes, and
was not considered a treatment-related
adverse effect.
Kidney toxicity is often associated
with exposure to aminoglycoside
antibiotics, and the metabolism study
indicated higher levels of radioactivity
in the kidneys than other tissues. In
male F1 rats in the reproductive toxicity
study, dilatation of the kidney, and an
increased incidence of chronic
progressive nephropathy were observed.
In the subchronic rat study, an
increased incidence of eosinophilic
bodies (graded slight for severity) in the
renal proximal tubular cells was
reported in males at several dose levels.
These effects were considered treatment
related, but not adverse due to their low
severity grade, and lack of associated
findings. However, in female rats,
increased epithelial cells in the urinary
sediment, along with decreased urine
pH (decreased pH was also seen in
males), were observed at the high dose,
and considered evidence of possible
kidney toxicity. Lipofuscin deposition
(slight) was observed in the rat
combined chronic toxicity/
carcinogenicity study, but was not
considered adverse due to the lack of
other related findings; this study tested
up to the no-observed-adverse-effect
level (NOAEL) of the subchronic study.
In the mouse, following subchronic
exposure, minimal to severe basophilia/
hyperplasia in the renal pars recta in
females was observed. No renal effects
were reported in the mouse
carcinogenicity study at lower doses, or
in the dog subchronic or chronic
studies.
There was no evidence that exposure
to kasugamycin results in neurotoxicity,
and a developmental neurotoxicity
(DNT) study is not required. Also, there
was no evidence of immune system
effects based on the review of a
submitted immunotoxicity study.
Although a 28-day rat inhalation
toxicity study was not submitted, EPA
has determined that it is not required
based on available hazard and exposure
information.
The database is complete with respect
to pre- and postnatal toxicity, and
shows no evidence of increased
qualitative or quantitative susceptibility
in the offspring, or in the developing
fetus. There was no evidence of
carcinogenicity in male and female
mice, nor in male and female rats at
doses that were adequate to assess the
carcinogenic potential of kasugamycin.
There was no evidence of mutagenicity.
Based on the overall weight of the
evidence, kasugamycin is classified as
‘‘not likely to be carcinogenic to
humans.’’
Although antimicrobial drug residues
present in or on food may cause adverse
effects on the ecology of the intestinal
microflora of consumers, the Agency
does not believe this is a concern for
kasugamycin because of the use pattern
(application occurring prior to fruit
development) and low residue detection
in field trials.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by kasugamycin as well
as the NOAEL and the LOAEL from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document
‘‘Kasugamycin. Human Health Risk
Assessment for the Proposed Use of the
Fungicide on Fruiting Vegetables, Pome
Fruits, and Walnuts’’ at pp. 15–21 in
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–
0297.
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 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 populationadjusted 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 kasugamycin used for human risk
assessment is shown in Table 1 of this
unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR KASUGAMYCIN RELEVANT TO FFDCA ANALYSIS
Exposure scenario
Acute dietary (all populations) .....
Chronic dietary (all populations
including infants and children,
and females age 13 to 49).
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Uncertainty and
FQPA SF
Point of departure
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
An appropriate dose and endpoint for this risk assessment scenario was not identified, based on a lack of
single-dose effects in the database.
NOAEL = 11 mg/kg/
day.
Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation)
UFA = 10X
UFH = 10X
FQPA SF = 1X
Chronic RfD = 0.11
mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.11 mg/kg/
day.
Combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study in the rat.
LOAEL = 116 mg/kg/day, based
on testicular atrophy and softening.
Classification: ‘‘Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.’’
Point of Departure = a data point or estimated point derived from observed dose-response data, which is used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally relevant human exposures. 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. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect level. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. LOC = level of concern.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Aug 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\29AUR1.SGM
29AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 168 / Friday, August 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to kasugamycin, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing kasugamycin tolerances in 40
CFR 180.614. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from kasugamycin 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 kasugamycin; 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
(USDA) 1994–1996 and the 1998
Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food
Intake by Individuals (CSFII). An
unrefined chronic aggregate dietary
(food and drinking water) exposure and
risk assessment was conducted using
the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
software with the Food Commodity
Intake Database (DEEM–FCIDTM),
Version 2.03. The residue inputs into
the dietary model were the
recommended tolerance level residues
and default processing factors were
used, with the exception of the apple
juice processing factor, for which the
1.5X data-derived processing factor was
used. EPA assumed 100% crop treated
(PCT) for all proposed uses.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that kasugamycin does not
pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore,
a quantitative dietary exposure
assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for kasugamycin. Tolerance level
residues and/or 100 PCT were assumed
for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for kasugamycin in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
kasugamycin. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Aug 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)
of kasugamycin for chronic exposures
for non-cancer assessments are
estimated to be 0.001178 ppm for
surface water. EDWCs of kasugamycin
for ground water were estimated to be
0.000116 ppm via the Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI–
GROW) system. Modeled estimates of
drinking water concentrations were
directly entered into the dietary
exposure model. For chronic dietary
risk assessment, the water concentration
of value 0.001178 ppm 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).
Kasugamycin is not registered for any
specific use patterns that would result
in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’ EPA has not
found kasugamycin to share a common
mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and kasugamycin does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has assumed that
kasugamycin 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
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
51495
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 Safety
Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this
provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There was no evidence of increased
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility
in rat or rabbit developmental toxicity
studies, or in the rat reproductive study.
No developmental effects were seen in
the rat developmental study, whereas
maternal toxicity (decreased body
weight gain, food consumption, and
feed efficiency) was observed at the
highest dose. Although no maternal or
developmental toxicity was observed in
the main rabbit developmental toxicity
study, in the dose range-finding study,
maternal weight loss, reduced food
consumption during dosing, and
abortions (occurring at GD 18 or later)
were observed at higher doses. Fetal
weight was decreased at the maternally
toxic dose but, due to abortions or
maternal death, was not evaluated at the
higher doses. In the rat reproductive
toxicity study, parental toxicity
included decreased parental body
weight/weight gain at the mid and high
doses. No offspring toxicity was
observed. Reproductive toxicity was
observed only at the highest dose tested
(above the parental LOAEL), with
testicular atrophy, decreased fertility
and fecundity in the F1 parents for both
litters, and an increased pre-coital
interval during the mating period for the
F2b litter.
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 for the following
reasons:
i. The toxicity database for
kasugamycin is complete, including rat
acute and subchronic neurotoxicity
screening studies and a mouse
immunotoxicity study. Based on the
lack of observed neurotoxicity, a DNT
study is not required. Furthermore, a 28day inhalation study is not required
based on the available hazard and
exposure information and proposed and
existing uses for kasugamycin.
ii. There is no evidence of increased
quantitative or qualitative pre- and/or
postnatal susceptibility observed in
developmental toxicity studies in the rat
and rabbit, or in a 2-generation
reproduction study in the rat.
E:\FR\FM\29AUR1.SGM
29AUR1
51496
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 168 / Friday, August 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
iii. The exposure assessment for food
and drinking water will not
underestimate potential dietary
exposure to kasugamycin. There are no
proposed or existing residential uses for
kasugamycin.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
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, kasugamycin 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 kasugamycin
from food and water are below HED’s
LOC of 100% of the cPAD for all
population subgroups. The most highly
exposed population subgroup, children
1–2 years old, had a risk estimate of
1.7% cPAD. There are no residential
uses for kasugamycin to aggregate with
chronic exposure to kasugamycin from
food and water.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk.
Short- and intermediate-term aggregate
exposures take into account short- and
intermediate-term residential exposures
plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Because there are no
residential uses for kasugamycin,
kasugamycin is not expected to pose a
short- or intermediate-term risk.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
kasugamycin is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
5. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to kasugamycin
residues.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Aug 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
high-performance liquid
chromatography with ultraviolet
detection (HPLC/UV) is available to
enforce the tolerance expression. The
method may be requested from: Chief,
Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;
telephone number: (410) 305–2905;
email address: residuemethods@
epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level. The Codex has not
established a MRL for kasugamycin.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
As EPA explained in its latest crop
group rulemaking published in the
Federal Register of August 22, 2012 (77
FR 50617) (FRL–9354–3), EPA will
attempt to conform petitions seeking
tolerances for crop groups to the newer
established crop groups, rather than
establish new tolerances under the preexisting crop groups, as part of its effort
to eventually convert tolerances for any
pre-existing crop group to tolerances
with coverage under the revised crop
group. Therefore, although the
petitioner requested tolerances for crop
group 11 (pome fruit), EPA evaluated
tolerances for crop group 11–10 (pome
fruit).
Based on the available residue data
and using the Organization for
Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) tolerance
calculation procedure, EPA is
establishing a tolerance of 0.20 ppm for
residues of kasugamycin in or on fruit,
pome (crop group 11–10).
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
EPA also is not establishing tolerances
for walnuts and fruiting vegetables
because the petitioner withdrew its
tolerance requests for those
commodities.
The Agency has revised the tolerance
expression in 40 CFR 180.614(a) to
clarify:
1. That, as provided in FFDCA section
408(a)(3), the tolerance covers
metabolites and degradates of
kasugamycin not specifically
mentioned.
2. That compliance with the specified
tolerance levels is to be determined by
measuring only the specific compounds
mentioned in the tolerance expression.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of kasugamycin, in or on
pome fruits (crop group 11–10) at 0.20
ppm. This regulation additionally
deletes the time-limited tolerance for
apple, as the tolerance will be
superseded by permanent tolerances in
the various pome fruits.
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.
E:\FR\FM\29AUR1.SGM
29AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 168 / Friday, August 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
and food retailers, not States or Tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132,
entitled ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999) and Executive Order
13175, entitled ‘‘Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments’’ (65 FR 67249, November
9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule.
In addition, this final rule does not
impose any enforceable duty or contain
any unfunded mandate as described
under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C.
1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Dated: August 20, 2014.
Marty Monell,
Acting Director, 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:18 Aug 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
51497
Oklahoma’s changes to its hazardous
waste program will take effect. If we
§ 180.614 Kasugamycin; tolerances for
receive comments that oppose this
residues.
action, we will publish a document in
(a) General. Tolerances are
the Federal Register withdrawing this
established for residues of kasugamycin, rule before it takes effect, and a separate
including its metabolites and
document in the proposed rules section
degradates, in or on the commodities
of this Federal Register will serve as a
listed in the following table.
proposal to authorize the changes.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
DATES: This final authorization will
specified is to be determined by
become effective on October 28, 2014
measuring only kasugamycin (3-O-[2unless the EPA receives adverse written
amino-4-[(carboxyimino-methyl)amino]- comment by September 29, 2014. If the
2,3,4,6-tetradeoxy-a-D-arabinoEPA receives such comment, it will
hexopyranosyl]-D-chiro-inositol) in or
publish a timely withdrawal of this
on the commodity.
immediate final rule in the Federal
Register and inform the public that this
Parts per
Commodity
authorization will not take effect.
million
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments by
Fruit, pome, group 11–10 .........
0.20 one of the following methods:
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8 1 ....
0.04
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
1 There is no U.S. registration as of Sepinstructions for submitting comments.
tember 1, 2005.
2. Email: patterson.alima@epa.gov.
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
3. Mail: Alima Patterson, Region 6,
[Reserved]
Regional Authorization Coordinator,
(c) Tolerances with regional
State/Tribal Oversight Section (6PD–O),
registrations. [Reserved]
Multimedia Planning and Permitting
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues.
Division, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross
[Reserved]
Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733.
4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver
[FR Doc. 2014–20502 Filed 8–28–14; 8:45 am]
your comments to Alima Patterson,
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Region 6, Regional Authorization
Coordinator, State/Tribal Oversight
Section (6PD–O), Multimedia Planning
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
and Permitting Division, EPA Region 6,
AGENCY
1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–
2733.
40 CFR Part 271
Instructions: Do not submit
[FRL–9915–97–Region–6; EPA–R06–RCRA–
information that you consider to be CBI
2013–0785]
or otherwise protected through
Oklahoma: Final Authorization of State regulations.gov, or email. The Federal
regulations.gov Web site is an
Hazardous Waste Management
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
Program Revision
means the EPA will not know your
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
identity or contact information unless
Agency.
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an email
ACTION: Direct final rule.
comment directly to the EPA without
SUMMARY: Oklahoma Department of
going through regulations.gov, your
Environmental Quality (ODEQ) has
email address will be automatically
applied to the Environmental Protection captured and included as part of the
Agency (EPA) for Final authorization of comment that is placed in the public
the changes to its hazardous waste
docket and made available on the
program under the Resource
Internet. If you submit an electronic
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). comment, the EPA recommends that
EPA has determined that these changes
you include your name and other
satisfy all requirements needed to
contact information in the body of your
qualify for Final authorization, and is
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
authorizing the State’s changes through
you submit. If the EPA cannot read your
this immediate final action. The EPA is
comment due to technical difficulties
publishing this rule to authorize the
and cannot contact you for clarification,
changes without a prior proposal
the EPA may not be able to consider
because we believe this action is not
your comment. Electronic files should
controversial and do not expect
avoid the use of special characters, any
comments that oppose it. Unless we
form of encryption, and be free of any
receive written comments which oppose defects or viruses.
this authorization during the comment
You can view and copy Oklahoma’s
period, the decision to authorize
application and associated publicly
■
2. Revise § 180.614 to read as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\29AUR1.SGM
29AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 168 (Friday, August 29, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51492-51497]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-20502]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0297; FRL-9911-57]
Kasugamycin; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of
kasugamycin in or on fruit, pome. Arysta LifeScience North America, LLC
(Arysta LifeScience), requested a number of tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) which are addressed in
this document.
DATES: This regulation is effective August 29, 2014. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 28, 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-2010-0297, 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), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois Rossi, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (703) 305-7090; email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers
[[Page 51493]]
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://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/
text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab02.tpl. To
access the OCSPP test guidelines referenced in this document
electronically, please go to https://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ``Test
Methods and Guidelines.''
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-2010-0297 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
October 28, 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-2010-0297, 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 May 19, 2010 (75 FR 28009) (FRL-8823-2),
EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 0F7689)
by Arysta LifeScience North America, LLC, 15401 Weston Parkway, Cary,
NC 27513. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.614 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the fungicide kasugamycin, in
or on fruiting vegetables (crop group 8) at 0.15 parts per million
(ppm), pome fruit (crop group 11) at 0.25 ppm, and walnuts at 0.04 ppm.
That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Arysta
LifeScience, the registrant, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the proposed tolerance levels and the crops for which
tolerances will be established. The reasons for these changes are
explained in Unit IV.C. The tolerance in imported fruiting vegetables,
crop group 8 is not being removed or revised at this time. This
regulation additionally deletes the time-limited tolerance for apple,
as the tolerance will be superseded by permanent tolerances in the
various pome fruits.
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 kasugamycin on pome
commodities, including exposure resulting from the tolerances
established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks
associated with kasugamycin 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.
Kasugamycin is a member of the aminoglycoside family of
antibiotics, which also includes streptomycin and gentamicin. These
agents inhibit bacterial protein synthesis by binding to the 30S
subunit of the bacterial ribosome. Their penetration through the cell
membrane of the bacterium depends partly on oxygen-dependent active
transport by a polyamine carrier system that seems to be absent in
mammalian systems.
Kasugamycin exhibits low acute toxicity, being only a mild dermal
and ocular irritant. The major effects observed across species in
multiple-dose studies were decreased body weights and body weight
gains. The primary target organs identified for kasugamycin were the
testes and kidney in the rat and mouse. However, these effects were
only seen at higher dose levels, generally at the highest dose tested
(HDT). In the combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study in rats,
the basis for the lowest-observed-adverse-effect level (LOAEL) was an
increased incidence and severity of testicular tubular atrophy,
observed during the histopathologic examinations at the end of the 2-
year dosing period, as well as at 6 months, and 1 year. Testicular
degeneration and atrophy
[[Page 51494]]
were observed in adult F1 males in the rat reproductive toxicity study
at the highest dose. Testicular tubular dilatation and degeneration
were observed in the mouse subchronic study, but at a dose that
exceeded the limit dose; the mouse carcinogenicity study tested at much
lower doses, and these effects were not observed. In the dog chronic
toxicity study, testicular inflammation was reported at the high dose,
but was not accompanied by atrophic or degenerative changes, and was
not considered a treatment-related adverse effect.
Kidney toxicity is often associated with exposure to aminoglycoside
antibiotics, and the metabolism study indicated higher levels of
radioactivity in the kidneys than other tissues. In male F1 rats in the
reproductive toxicity study, dilatation of the kidney, and an increased
incidence of chronic progressive nephropathy were observed. In the
subchronic rat study, an increased incidence of eosinophilic bodies
(graded slight for severity) in the renal proximal tubular cells was
reported in males at several dose levels. These effects were considered
treatment related, but not adverse due to their low severity grade, and
lack of associated findings. However, in female rats, increased
epithelial cells in the urinary sediment, along with decreased urine pH
(decreased pH was also seen in males), were observed at the high dose,
and considered evidence of possible kidney toxicity. Lipofuscin
deposition (slight) was observed in the rat combined chronic toxicity/
carcinogenicity study, but was not considered adverse due to the lack
of other related findings; this study tested up to the no-observed-
adverse-effect level (NOAEL) of the subchronic study. In the mouse,
following subchronic exposure, minimal to severe basophilia/hyperplasia
in the renal pars recta in females was observed. No renal effects were
reported in the mouse carcinogenicity study at lower doses, or in the
dog subchronic or chronic studies.
There was no evidence that exposure to kasugamycin results in
neurotoxicity, and a developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) study is not
required. Also, there was no evidence of immune system effects based on
the review of a submitted immunotoxicity study. Although a 28-day rat
inhalation toxicity study was not submitted, EPA has determined that it
is not required based on available hazard and exposure information.
The database is complete with respect to pre- and postnatal
toxicity, and shows no evidence of increased qualitative or
quantitative susceptibility in the offspring, or in the developing
fetus. There was no evidence of carcinogenicity in male and female
mice, nor in male and female rats at doses that were adequate to assess
the carcinogenic potential of kasugamycin. There was no evidence of
mutagenicity. Based on the overall weight of the evidence, kasugamycin
is classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.''
Although antimicrobial drug residues present in or on food may
cause adverse effects on the ecology of the intestinal microflora of
consumers, the Agency does not believe this is a concern for
kasugamycin because of the use pattern (application occurring prior to
fruit development) and low residue detection in field trials.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by kasugamycin as well as the NOAEL and the
LOAEL from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document ``Kasugamycin. Human Health Risk
Assessment for the Proposed Use of the Fungicide on Fruiting
Vegetables, Pome Fruits, and Walnuts'' at pp. 15-21 in docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0297.
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 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 kasugamycin used for human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Kasugamycin Relevant to FFDCA Analysis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Study and
Exposure scenario Point of departure Uncertainty and RfD, PAD, LOC for toxicological
FQPA SF risk assessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (all populations). An appropriate dose and endpoint for this risk assessment scenario was not
identified, based on a lack of single-dose effects in the database.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (all populations NOAEL = 11 mg/kg/ UFA = 10X Chronic RfD = 0.11 Combined chronic
including infants and children, day. UFH = 10X......... mg/kg/day. toxicity/
and females age 13 to 49). FQPA SF = 1X...... cPAD = 0.11 mg/kg/ carcinogenicity
day. study in the rat.
LOAEL = 116 mg/kg/
day, based on
testicular
atrophy and
softening.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (oral, dermal, Classification: ``Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.''
inhalation).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of Departure = a data point or estimated point derived from observed dose-response data, which is used to
mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally relevant human
exposures. 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. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect level. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect
level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. LOC = level of concern.
[[Page 51495]]
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to kasugamycin, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing kasugamycin tolerances in 40 CFR
180.614. EPA assessed dietary exposures from kasugamycin 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 kasugamycin; 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 (USDA) 1994-1996 and the 1998 Nationwide
Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII). An unrefined
chronic aggregate dietary (food and drinking water) exposure and risk
assessment was conducted using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
software with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-
FCIDTM), Version 2.03. The residue inputs into the dietary
model were the recommended tolerance level residues and default
processing factors were used, with the exception of the apple juice
processing factor, for which the 1.5X data-derived processing factor
was used. EPA assumed 100% crop treated (PCT) for all proposed uses.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that kasugamycin does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a quantitative dietary exposure assessment for the purpose
of assessing cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the dietary assessment
for kasugamycin. Tolerance level residues and/or 100 PCT were assumed
for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for kasugamycin in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of kasugamycin. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)
of kasugamycin for chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments are
estimated to be 0.001178 ppm for surface water. EDWCs of kasugamycin
for ground water were estimated to be 0.000116 ppm via the Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW) system. Modeled estimates of
drinking water concentrations were directly entered into the dietary
exposure model. For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration of value 0.001178 ppm 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).
Kasugamycin is not registered for any specific use patterns that
would result in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' EPA has not found
kasugamycin to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and kasugamycin does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that kasugamycin 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 Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There was no evidence of
increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility in rat or rabbit
developmental toxicity studies, or in the rat reproductive study. No
developmental effects were seen in the rat developmental study, whereas
maternal toxicity (decreased body weight gain, food consumption, and
feed efficiency) was observed at the highest dose. Although no maternal
or developmental toxicity was observed in the main rabbit developmental
toxicity study, in the dose range-finding study, maternal weight loss,
reduced food consumption during dosing, and abortions (occurring at GD
18 or later) were observed at higher doses. Fetal weight was decreased
at the maternally toxic dose but, due to abortions or maternal death,
was not evaluated at the higher doses. In the rat reproductive toxicity
study, parental toxicity included decreased parental body weight/weight
gain at the mid and high doses. No offspring toxicity was observed.
Reproductive toxicity was observed only at the highest dose tested
(above the parental LOAEL), with testicular atrophy, decreased
fertility and fecundity in the F1 parents for both litters, and an
increased pre-coital interval during the mating period for the F2b
litter.
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 for the following reasons:
i. The toxicity database for kasugamycin is complete, including rat
acute and subchronic neurotoxicity screening studies and a mouse
immunotoxicity study. Based on the lack of observed neurotoxicity, a
DNT study is not required. Furthermore, a 28-day inhalation study is
not required based on the available hazard and exposure information and
proposed and existing uses for kasugamycin.
ii. There is no evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative
pre- and/or postnatal susceptibility observed in developmental toxicity
studies in the rat and rabbit, or in a 2-generation reproduction study
in the rat.
[[Page 51496]]
iii. The exposure assessment for food and drinking water will not
underestimate potential dietary exposure to kasugamycin. There are no
proposed or existing residential uses for kasugamycin.
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,
kasugamycin 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
kasugamycin from food and water are below HED's LOC of 100% of the cPAD
for all population subgroups. The most highly exposed population
subgroup, children 1-2 years old, had a risk estimate of 1.7% cPAD.
There are no residential uses for kasugamycin to aggregate with chronic
exposure to kasugamycin from food and water.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. Short- and intermediate-term
aggregate exposures take into account short- and intermediate-term
residential exposures plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background exposure level). Because there are no
residential uses for kasugamycin, kasugamycin is not expected to pose a
short- or intermediate-term risk.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, kasugamycin is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to kasugamycin residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology high-performance liquid
chromatography with ultraviolet detection (HPLC/UV) is available to
enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905;
email address: residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level. The Codex has not
established a MRL for kasugamycin.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
As EPA explained in its latest crop group rulemaking published in
the Federal Register of August 22, 2012 (77 FR 50617) (FRL-9354-3), EPA
will attempt to conform petitions seeking tolerances for crop groups to
the newer established crop groups, rather than establish new tolerances
under the pre-existing crop groups, as part of its effort to eventually
convert tolerances for any pre-existing crop group to tolerances with
coverage under the revised crop group. Therefore, although the
petitioner requested tolerances for crop group 11 (pome fruit), EPA
evaluated tolerances for crop group 11-10 (pome fruit).
Based on the available residue data and using the Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) tolerance calculation
procedure, EPA is establishing a tolerance of 0.20 ppm for residues of
kasugamycin in or on fruit, pome (crop group 11-10).
EPA also is not establishing tolerances for walnuts and fruiting
vegetables because the petitioner withdrew its tolerance requests for
those commodities.
The Agency has revised the tolerance expression in 40 CFR
180.614(a) to clarify:
1. That, as provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), the tolerance
covers metabolites and degradates of kasugamycin not specifically
mentioned.
2. That compliance with the specified tolerance levels is to be
determined by measuring only the specific compounds mentioned in the
tolerance expression.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of kasugamycin,
in or on pome fruits (crop group 11-10) at 0.20 ppm. This regulation
additionally deletes the time-limited tolerance for apple, as the
tolerance will be superseded by permanent tolerances in the various
pome fruits.
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.
[[Page 51497]]
This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: August 20, 2014.
Marty Monell,
Acting Director, 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. Revise Sec. 180.614 to read as follows:
Sec. 180.614 Kasugamycin; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of
kasugamycin, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities listed in the following table. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified is to be determined by measuring only
kasugamycin (3-O-[2-amino-4-[(carboxyimino-methyl)amino]-2,3,4,6-
tetradeoxy-[alpha]-D-arabino-hexopyranosyl]-D-chiro-inositol) in or on
the commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fruit, pome, group 11-10................................... 0.20
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8 \1\........................... 0.04
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There is no U.S. registration as of September 1, 2005.
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2014-20502 Filed 8-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P