Prallethrin; Pesticide Tolerances, 64322-64330 [2014-25732]
Download as PDF
64322
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 209 / Wednesday, October 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This final rule directly regulates
growers, food processors, food handlers,
and food retailers, not States or tribes,
nor does this action alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such,
the Agency has determined that this
action will not have a substantial direct
effect on States or tribal governments,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this final rule. In addition, this final
rule does not impose any enforceable
duty or contain any unfunded mandate
as described under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Oct 28, 2014
Jkt 235001
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: October 16, 2014.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting 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 § 180.205:
a. In the table for paragraph (a),
remove the entries for ‘‘Ginger’’ and
‘‘Potato’’ and add alphabetically the
entry ‘‘Vegetable, tuberous and corm,
subgroup 1C’’;
■ b. In the table for paragraph (c),
remove the entries for and ‘‘Cassava,’’
‘‘Tanier,’’ and ‘‘Yam, true, tuber’’.
The addition reads as follows:
■
■
§ 180.205 Paraquat; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
Parts
per million
Commodity
*
*
*
Vegetable, tuberous and
corn, subgroup 1C ............
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.50
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2014–25592 Filed 10–28–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0659; FRL–9917–30]
Prallethrin; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of the insecticide
prallethrin, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on all food
commodities from use of prallethrin in
food handling establishments where
food and food products are held,
processed, prepared and/or served, or as
a wide-area mosquito adulticide at 1.0
part per million (ppm). McLaughlin
Gormley King Company requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This regulation is effective
October 29, 2014. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before December 29, 2014, and
must be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0659, 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:
Daniel J. Rosenblatt, Registration
Division (RD) (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:
DATES:
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.
E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM
29OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 209 / Wednesday, October 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2013–0659 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 December 29, 2014. Addresses for
mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40
CFR 178.25(b).
In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please
submit a copy of the filing (excluding
any Confidential Business Information
(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket.
Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior
notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your
objection or hearing request, identified
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2013–0659, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
Additional instructions on commenting
or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is
available at https://www.epa.gov/
dockets.
CFR 180.545 be amended by
establishing a tolerance of 1.0 ppm for
residues of the insecticide prallethrin,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on all raw agricultural
commodities and processed food, and
food products in food handling
establishments where food and food
products are held, processed, prepared
and/or served, or as a wide-area
mosquito adulticide. That document
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by McLaughlin Gormley King
Company, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
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 section 408(b)(2)(D)
of FFDCA, and the factors specified in
section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, 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 prallethrin
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with prallethrin follows.
In the Federal Register of October 25,
2013 (78 FR 63938) (FRL–9901–96),
EPA issued a document pursuant to
section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 2F8090) by
McLaughlin Gormley King Company,
8810 Tenth Avenue, Minneapolis, MN
55427. The petition requested that 40
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Oct 28, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
64323
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
Prallethrin is a member of the
pyrethroid class of insecticides.
Pyrethroids have historically been
classified into two groups, Type I and
Type II, based upon chemical structure
and neurotoxicological effect. Type I
pyrethroids lack an alpha-cyano moiety
and induce a syndrome consisting of
aggressive sparring, altered sensitivity to
external stimuli, and fine tremor
progressing to whole-body tremor and
prostration in rats. These Type I
pyrethroid-specific behaviors are
collectively described as the Tsyndrome. Type II pyrethroids contain
an alpha-cyano moiety and produce a
syndrome that includes pawing,
burrowing, salivation, and coarse
tremors leading to choreoathetosis in
rats. These Type II pyrethroid-specific
behaviors are collectively described as
the CS-syndrome (Verschoyle and
Aldridge 1980; Lawrence and Casida
1982). Prallethrin is structurally similar
to Type I pyrethroids. The adverse
outcome pathway (AOP) shared by
pyrethroids involves the ability to
interact with voltage-gated sodium
channels (VGSCs) in the central and
peripheral nervous system, leading to
changes in neuron firing, and ultimately
neurotoxicity.
Prallethrin has been evaluated for a
variety of toxic effects in experimental
toxicity studies. Neurotoxicity was
observed throughout the database and is
the most sensitive endpoint. Effects
were seen across species, sexes, and
routes of administration. In the acute rat
neurotoxicity study, decreased
exploratory behavior was seen at the
time of peak effect. Reduced motor
activity and transient tremors were also
observed in the study. In the subchronic
rat neurotoxicity study, a higher arousal
rate was observed in animals at the
highest dose tested. Clinical signs of
neurotoxicity were also observed in
other toxicity studies (subchronic and
chronic oral studies in dogs,
developmental toxicity studies in the rat
and rabbit, 21-day dermal and 28-day
inhalation studies in rats). No
neurotoxic effects were observed in rats
in the chronic toxicity study.
Effects were also observed in the liver
(rats, mice, and dogs), heart (dogs), and
thyroid gland (rats). Some effects were
also seen in the kidney (mice and rats).
However, neurotoxicity was the most
sensitive endpoint in the toxicology
database, and other effects were
generally seen in the presence of
neurotoxicity and/or at higher doses.
Liver effects observed included
increased weight, elevated serum
cholesterol and alkaline phosphatase
E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM
29OCR1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
64324
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 209 / Wednesday, October 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
activity, centrilobular hepatocyte
vacuolation, histiocytic infiltration,
enlarged liver, and perilobular
hepatocellular hypertrophy. In dogs,
myocardial fiber degeneration was seen
in females in the subchronic study at
the highest dose tested. Heart effects
were also seen in one mid-dose female
in the chronic study (hemorrhage and
red discoloration). However, there was
no dose response for the observed heart
lesions in the study. Thyroid effects
were observed in rats and consisted of
increases in the number of small
follicles and follicular cell hypertrophy
and hyperplasia. The thyroid effects
were seen in short-term studies in the
presence of liver effects. Kidney effects
observed were increased weights and
histopathology.
Developmental and reproduction
studies are available for prallethrin.
There was no evidence of increased
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility
in any of the studies. In the
developmental studies, no toxic effects
were noted in fetuses up to the highest
doses tested. Maternal effects in the
studies included tremors, salivation,
exaggerated reflexes, and
chromorhinorrhea. In the reproduction
study, decreased pup body weights were
seen during the lactation period. Effects
seen in parental animals were decreased
body weights and body weight gains,
increased liver weights and microscopic
findings in the liver, kidney, thyroid,
and pituitary.
Prallethrin is classified as ‘‘Not Likely
to be Carcinogenic to Humans.’’ No
tumors were observed in rat and mouse
carcinogenicity studies up to the highest
doses tested. In both the rat and mouse
studies, the animals could have
tolerated higher dose levels; however,
EPA determined that dose levels were
adequate to assess potential
carcinogenicity.
Prallethrin tested negative in the
majority of the genotoxicity studies. It
also tested negative in an in vitro
chromosomal aberration study in
Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO K1) cells
without metabolic activation, but tested
positive at all doses with metabolic
activation. However, clastogenicity was
not clearly dose-related, was seen at
nontoxic and slightly toxic doses, and
was not expressed in in vivo studies and
structure-activity comparisons with the
other pyrethroids revealed no
correlations with clastogenicity. Other
gene mutation, chromosomal aberration,
and unscheduled DNA synthesis (UDS)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Oct 28, 2014
Jkt 235001
studies were negative; therefore, there is
no concern for genotoxicity.
Acute lethality studies conducted
with prallethrin indicate moderate acute
toxicity via the oral and inhalation
routes of administration (Category II)
and low acute toxicity via the dermal
route (Categories IV). It is not irritating
to the skin (Category IV) but is
minimally irritating to the eye (Category
IV). It is not a dermal sensitizer. The
weight of evidence from the available
guideline, non-guideline, mechanism of
action, and pharmacokinetics studies
supports characterizing the toxicological
profile of pyrethroids, including
prallethrin, as being rapid in onset and
associated with acute, peak exposures.
Also, there is no apparent increase in
hazard from repeated/chronic exposures
to prallethrin.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by prallethrin as well as
the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found in the
document titled ‘‘Prallethrin: Human
Health Risk Assessment for the
Tolerance Petition to Amend the Section
3 Mosquito Adulticide Registration to
Include Use of the Insecticide Over All
Crops,’’ dated September 15, 2014, by
going to https://www.regulations.gov.
The referenced document is available in
the docket established by this action,
which is described under ADDRESSES.
Locate and click on the hyperlink for
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2013–0659. Double-click on the
document to view the referenced
information.
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 are
identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 prallethrin used for
human risk assessment are shown in
Tables 1 and 2 of this unit. Based on the
proposed use patterns for prallethrin,
endpoints and points of departure were
selected for dietary (acute only), dermal,
inhalation, and incidental oral
exposures.
For oral exposures (acute dietary and
incidental oral), the endpoint and POD
were selected from a chronic dog study
in which neurotoxicity was observed
within 4 weeks of dosing and was
considered to have potentially resulted
from a single dose, based on a weightof-the-evidence. For dermal assessment,
the endpoint was selected from the
route-specific 21-day dermal study in
the rat, in which clinical signs were
observed within 1 to 3 days of dosing.
The endpoints being used to assess oral
and dermal exposures are the same
(neurotoxicity); therefore, risks from
those routes of exposure were
combined. Although the LOAEL for
inhalation is also based on
neurotoxicity, derivation of the human
equivalent concentrations (HECs) used
for inhalation risk assessment shows
that assessing inhalation exposure based
on the portal-of-entry effects is
protective of the systemic endpoints,
including neurotoxicity. As a result,
inhalation exposure was not combined
with either the dermal or the oral routes
of exposure.
A chronic dietary risk assessment was
not conducted for prallethrin. Given
what is known about pyrethroid
toxicokinetics/dynamics, in general, and
as there is no apparent increase in
hazard from repeated/chronic exposures
to prallethrin, the acute dietary
exposure assessment is protective of
chronic dietary exposures. Based on the
toxicity profile, intermediate- or longterm exposure assessments were not
conducted for adults or children.
E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM
29OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 209 / Wednesday, October 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
64325
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR PRALLETHRIN FOR USE IN DIETARY AND NONOCCUPATIONAL HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENTS
Exposure/scenario
Acute Dietary (Children ≥6
years old and Adults).
Acute Dietary (Children <6
years old).
Incidental Oral Short-Term (1 to
30 days).
Dermal Short-term (1 to 30
days) (Children <6 years old).
Dermal Short-term (1 to 30
days) (Children ≥6 years old
and Adults).
Inhalation Short-term (1 to 30
days) (Children <6 years old).
Inhalation Short-term (1 to 30
days) (Children ≥6 years old
and Adults).
Point of departure
and uncertainty/
FQPA safety factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
NOAEL = 2.5 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10×
UFH = 10×
FQPA SF = 1×
NOAEL = 2.5 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10×
UFH = 10×
FQPA SF = 3×
NOAEL = 2.5 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10×
UFH = 10×
FQPA SF = 3×
Dermal NOAEL = 30
mg/kg/day.
UFA = 10×
UFH = 10×
FQPA SF = 3×
Dermal NOAEL = 30
mg/kg/day.
UFA = 10×
UFH = 10×
FQPA SF = 1×
Inhalation NOAEL =
0.001 mg/L.
UFA = 3×
UFH = 10×
FQPA SF = 3×
HEC/HED calculations used for risk
assessment (see
below)
Inhalation NOAEL =
0.001 mg/L.
UFA = 3×
UFH = 10×
FQPA SF = 1×
HEC/HED calculations used for risk
assessment
Acute RfD = 0.025
mg/kg/day.
aPAD= 0.025 mg/kg/
day.
Chronic dog study (capsule). LOAEL = 5 mg/kg/day based on
clinical signs of neurotoxicity.
Acute RfD = 0.025
mg/kg/day.
aPAD= 0.008 mg/kg/
day
Residential LOC for
MOE = 300.
Residential LOC for
MOE = 300.
21-day Dermal Rat. LOAEL = 150 mg/kg/day based on observed clinical signs of toxicity (fixation, abnormal gait, tremors, sensitivity to external stimuli, vocalization, twitching and
writhing spasms), all beginning between days 1 and 3 of a
21-day dermal study in rats.
Residential LOC for
MOE = 100.
Residential LOC for
MOE = 100.
28-Day Inhalation Rat. LOAEL = 0.0044 mg/L based on irregular respiration, decreased spontaneous activity, salivation,
incontinence, and nasal discharge.
Residential LOC for
MOE = 30.
aPAD = acute population adjusted dose. FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. HEC = human equivalent concentration. HED = human equivalent
dose. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. LOC = level of concern. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no observed adverse effect
level. Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is derived from observed dose-response data and used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally relevant human exposures. 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).
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR PRALLETHRIN FOR USE IN DIETARY AND NONOCCUPATIONAL HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENTS
Residential
Residential HECs and HEDs ....
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Residential LOC for MOE = 100
(Children <6 years old).
Residential LOC for MOE = 30
(Children ≥6 years old and
Adults).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Oct 28, 2014
HECs
Handler/Outdoor
Post-application.
Indoor Post-application without air
ventilation.
Indoor Post-application with air ventilation.
Bystander ................
0.00020 mg/L ..........
0.006 mg/kg/day.
0.00014 mg/L ..........
N/A.
Adults: 0.00004 mg/L
Children: 0.00003
mg/L.
0.00002 mg/L ..........
N/A.
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
HEDs
N/A.
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM
29OCR1
64326
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 209 / Wednesday, October 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR PRALLETHRIN FOR USE IN DIETARY AND NONOCCUPATIONAL HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENTS—Continued
Residential
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).
HECs
HEDs
Classification: ‘‘Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans.’’
HEC = human equivalent concentration. HED = human equivalent dose. Kg = kilogram. LOC = level of concern. L = Liter. Mg = milligram.
MOE = margin of exposure. N/A = Not applicable.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to prallethrin, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing
prallethrin tolerances in 40 CFR
180.545. Acute and chronic aggregate
dietary (food and drinking water)
exposure assessments were conducted
using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation
Model software with the Food
Commodity Intake Database (DEEM–
FCID) Version 3.16. This software uses
2003–2008 food consumption data from
the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s
(USDA’s) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America, (NHANES/WWEIA).
i. Acute exposure. The acute dietary
risk assessment is partially refined, and
is based on the assumption that as a
result of potential use in food handling
establishments (FHEs), most
commodities will have residues at onehalf the limit of quantification (LOQ) of
the analytical method used in the FHE
residue trials (0.05 ppm). It was also
based on the assumptions that all flour
food forms will contain residues at the
highest level found in the FHE residue
trials on flour, and that tree nuts and
peanuts will contain residues at the
highest level found in the FHE residue
trials on peanuts. Based on residue data,
the highest residue value (0.0045 ppm)
was used for all crops as a result of
treatment from the mosquito adulticide
use.
The percent FHE value of 4.65% was
applied to the FHE residue values, and
the adulticide residues were
incorporated at a level of 100% (i.e., all
foods could potentially have residues
resulting from the mosquito adulticide
use). Residues from food handling
(modified by the % FHE estimate) and
mosquito adulticide treatments were
combined.
ii. Chronic exposure. A chronic
dietary risk assessment was not
conducted. However, a chronic
exposure assessment was conducted to
determine background levels of dietary
exposure for estimating aggregate risk.
The exposure estimates are based on the
highest residue value from the FHE
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Oct 28, 2014
Jkt 235001
residue trials for tree nuts, peanuts, and
all flour food forms; and on the LOQ of
the method used in the FHE trials (0.10
ppm). The data were treated in the same
manner as the data in the acute dietary
risk assessment, with the exception that
the average residue value from the
adulticide trials (0.0007 ppm) was used
instead of the highest residue value
(0.0045 ppm).
For the chronic exposure assessment,
EPA applied a percent FHE value of
4.65% to the FHE residue values and
assumed 100 percent crop treated (PCT)
for the proposed mosquito adulticide
use, just as we have done for the acute
exposure assessment. This value is
considered to be an overestimate of the
potential for the mosquito adulticide to
drift onto growing crops. Residues from
the FHE and adulticide uses were then
combined. Processing factors were not
used because the assumption was made
that foods in an FHE could be treated
after processing.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that prallethrin does not pose
a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a
dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. Section
408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that EPA to
states that the Agency may use data on
the actual percent of food treated for
assessing chronic dietary risk only if:
• Condition a: The data used are
reliable and provide a valid basis to
show what percentage of the food
derived from such crop is likely to
contain the pesticide residue.
• Condition b: The exposure estimate
does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group.
• Condition c: Data are available on
pesticide use and food consumption in
a particular area, the exposure estimate
does not understate exposure for the
population in such area. In addition, the
Agency must provide for periodic
evaluation of any estimates used. To
provide for the periodic evaluation of
the estimate of PCT as required by
section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA, EPA may
require registrants to submit data on
PCT.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
In most cases, EPA uses available data
from United States Department of
Agriculture/National Agricultural
Statistics Service (USDA/NASS),
proprietary market surveys, and the
National Pesticide Use Database for the
chemical/crop combination for the most
recent 6–7 years. EPA uses an average
PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis.
The average PCT figure for each existing
use is derived by combining available
public and private market survey data
for that use, averaging across all
observations, and rounding to the
nearest 5%, except for those situations
in which the average PCT is less than
one. In those cases, 1% is used as the
average PCT and 2.5% is used as the
maximum PCT. EPA uses a maximum
PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the highest
observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available
public and private market survey data
for the existing use and rounded up to
the nearest multiple of 5%.
The Agency estimates a maximum
4.65% probability that a food a person
consumes contains residues as a result
of treatment in an FHE at some point
with any pesticide (i.e., it is not specific
to prallethrin). This value was derived
by taking into account the daily
probability of treatment and the percent
of expenditures resulting in potential
residues in restaurants, commercial
kitchens, food warehouses, and food
processors. For both the acute and
chronic assessments, this value was
used for the FHE component of the
residue for all commodities with the
exception of drinking water.
The Agency believes that the three
conditions discussed in Unit III.C.1.iv.
have been met. With respect to
Condition a, PCT estimates are derived
from Federal and private market survey
data, which are reliable and have a valid
basis. The Agency is reasonably certain
that the percentage of the food treated
is not likely to be an underestimation.
As to Conditions b and c, regional
consumption information and
consumption information for significant
subpopulations is taken into account
through EPA’s computer-based model
for evaluating the exposure of
significant subpopulations including
E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM
29OCR1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 209 / Wednesday, October 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
several regional groups. Use of this
consumption information in EPA’s risk
assessment process ensures that EPA’s
exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant
subpopulation group and allows the
Agency to be reasonably certain that no
regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those
estimated by the Agency. Other than the
data available through national food
consumption surveys, EPA does not
have available reliable information on
the regional consumption of food to
which prallethrin may be applied in a
particular area.
Specific information on the
methodology to estimate PCT can be
found in the document entitled
‘‘Prallethrin: Upper Bound Estimate of
the Likelihood of Insecticide Residues
on Food Resulting from Treatment in
Food Handling Establishments,’’ dated
September 7, 2014, by going to https://
www.regulations.gov.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for prallethrin. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical,
chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of prallethrin. Further
information regarding EPA drinking
water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at
https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/
water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir
Screening Tool (FIRST), Tier II Pesticide
Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis
Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS), and
the Pesticide Flooded Application
Model (PFAM), the surface water
estimated drinking water concentration
(EDWC) value of 0.591 parts per billion
(ppb) was used in the acute assessment
and that the annual average surface
water EDWC value of 0.0375 ppb was
used in the chronic assessment.
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).
Prallethrin is currently registered for
the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: A variety of
residential pet, indoor and outdoor uses
for pests found on turf, and in homes
and commercial settings, including food
handling establishments. However, for
purposes of this assessment, only
registered residential products and use
sites with the highest application rates
or percent active ingredient (a.i.) were
assessed because they are representative
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Oct 28, 2014
Jkt 235001
of the worst case exposure scenarios for
the exposed populations.
EPA assessed potential residential
handler exposure scenarios resulting
from mixing/loading/applying sprays to
lawns using hose-end and backpack
sprayers because exposure from treating
lawns were higher than from other
application methods and sites. A
quantitative assessment was not
required for handling of total release
fogger products since the labels state
that the room/house must be vacated
immediately by the user once initiated.
EPA assessed post-application dermal
exposure for adults and children as well
as incidental oral (i.e., hand-to-mouth)
exposure for children resulting from
contact with residues deposited on turf
and indoor surfaces following
application with aerial and truckmounted fogger mosquito vector control
applications, hand-held spray
applications on turf and lawn, and
indoor aerosol foggers, respectively.
Adult and child post-application
inhalation exposure resulting from both
aerial and truck-mounted mosquito
vector control applications were also
assessed. A quantitative postapplication inhalation exposure
assessment was not performed for turf
or indoor aerosol foggers because
inhalation exposure from these
application methods is anticipated to be
negligible. 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.’’
The Agency has determined that the
pyrethroids and pyrethrins share a
common mechanism of toxicity (go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
under document ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2008–0489–0006). The members of
this group share the ability to interact
with voltage-gated sodium channels
ultimately leading to neurotoxicity. The
cumulative risk assessment for the
pyrethroids/pyrethrins was published
on November 9, 2011, and is available
at https://www.regulations.gov under
EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0746. No
cumulative risks of concern were
identified, allowing the Agency to
consider new uses for pyrethroids. For
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
64327
information regarding EPA’s efforts to
determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity, and to
evaluate the cumulative effects of this
class of chemicals, see EPA’s Web site
at https://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/
reevaluation/pyrethroidspyrethrins.html.
Prallethrin is included in the
pyrethroids/pyrethrins cumulative risk
assessment. No dietary, residential or
aggregate risk estimates of concern have
been identified in the single chemical
assessment. In the cumulative
assessment, residential exposure was
the greatest contributor to the total
exposure. An existing residential turf
use for prallethrin was evaluated to
determine the potential contribution it
would have on the cumulative risk
assessment. Although the turf use was
considered the main contributor for
residential exposure, the turf assessment
indicated that exposure from turf would
not impact the residential component of
the cumulative risk estimates for the
pyrethroids.
Therefore, since the proposed
mosquito adulticide contributes far less
exposure than the registered turf uses,
there will be no impact on the
residential component of the cumulative
risk estimates.
Dietary exposures make a minor
contribution to the total pyrethroid
exposure. The dietary exposure
assessment performed in support of the
pyrethroid cumulative was much more
highly refined than that performed for
prallethrin. In addition, for the
prallethrin risk assessment, the most
sensitive apical endpoint in the
prallethrin database was selected to
derive the POD. Further, the POD
selected for prallethrin is specific to
prallethrin, whereas the POD selected
for the cumulative assessment was
based on common mechanism of action
data that are appropriate for all 20
pyrethroids included in the cumulative
assessment. Dietary exposure to
prallethrin residues resulting from the
proposed mosquito adulticide use over
all crops will contribute very little to the
dietary exposure to prallethrin alone;
therefore, the proposed use will make
an insignificant contribution to dietary
risk to the pyrethroids as a whole.
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,
E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM
29OCR1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
64328
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 209 / Wednesday, October 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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.
The prallethrin toxicity database
includes developmental toxicity studies
in the rat and rabbit, and a reproduction
study in the rat. No evidence of
increased qualitative or quantitative
susceptibility was noted in any of these
studies. This lack of susceptibility is
consistent with the results of guideline
developmental and reproduction studies
with other pyrethroid pesticides.
High-dose studies assessing what dose
results in lethality to 50% of the tested
population (LD50) in the scientific
literature indicate that pyrethroid
exposure can result in increased
quantitative sensitivity in the young,
specifically in the form of neurotoxicity.
Examination of pharmacokinetic and
pharmacodynamic data indicates that
the sensitivity observed at high doses is
related to pyrethroid age-dependent
pharmacokinetics, which is the activity
of enzymes associated with the
metabolism of pyrethroids. With
otherwise equivalent administered
doses for adults and juveniles,
predictive pharmacokinetic models
indicate that the differential adultjuvenile pharmacokinetics will result in
a 3x greater dose at the target organ in
juveniles compared to adults. No
evidence of increased quantitative or
qualitative susceptibility was seen in
the pyrethroid scientific literature
related to pharmacodynamics (the effect
of pyrethroids at the target tissue) both
with regard to interspecies differences
between rats and humans and to
differences between juveniles and
adults. Specifically, there are in vitro
pharmacodynamic data and in vivo data
indicating similar responses between
adult and juvenile rats at low doses and
data indicating that the rat is a
conservative model compared to the
human based on species-specific
pharmacodynamics of homologous
sodium channel isoforms in rats and
humans.
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 3x for infants and
children less than 6 years of age. For the
general population, including children
greater than 6 years of age, EPA is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Oct 28, 2014
Jkt 235001
reducing the FQPA SF to 1x. These
decisions are based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicology database for
prallethrin is considered complete with
respect to guideline toxicity studies for
prallethrin; however, the Agency lacks
additional information to fully
characterize the potential for juvenile
sensitivity to the neurotoxic effects of
pyrethroids. In light of the literature
studies indicating a possibility of
increased sensitivity in juvenile rats at
high doses, EPA identified a need, and
requested proposals for, additional nonguideline studies to evaluate the
potential for sensitivity in juvenile rats.
A group of pyrethroid registrants is
currently conducting those studies.
Pending the results of those studies,
however, the available toxicity studies
for prallethrin can be used to
characterize toxic effects including
potential developmental and
reproductive toxicity, as well as
neurotoxicity. Acceptable
developmental toxicity studies in rats
and rabbits, reproduction studies in rats,
neurotoxicity studies (acute,
subchronic, and developmental) in rats
are available. In addition, route-specific
dermal and inhalation toxicity studies
are available. The Immunotoxicity study
has been waived. As discussed in Unit
IV.D.2., EPA concludes that the 3x
FQPA SF will be adequate for protecting
infants and children less than 6 years
old.
ii. After reviewing the extensive body
of data and peer-reviewed literature on
pyrethroids, the Agency has reached a
number of conclusions regarding fetal
and juvenile sensitivity for pyrethroids,
including the following:
• Based on an evaluation of over 70
guideline toxicity studies for 24
pyrethroids submitted to the Agency,
including prenatal developmental
toxicity studies in rats and rabbits, and
pre- and postnatal multi-generation
reproduction toxicity studies and DNTs
in rats in support of pyrethroid
registrations, there is no evidence that
pyrethroids directly impact developing
fetuses. None of the studies show any
indications of fetal toxicity at doses that
do not cause maternal toxicity.
• Increased susceptibility was seen in
offspring animals in the DNT study with
the pyrethroid zeta-cypermethrin
(decreased pup body weights) and DNT
and reproduction studies with another
pyrethroid beta-cyfluthrin (decreased
body weights and tremors). However,
the reductions in body weight and the
other non-specific effects occur at
higher doses than neurotoxicity, the
effect of concern for pyrethroids. The
available developmental and
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
reproduction guideline studies in rats
with zeta-cypermethrin did not show
increased sensitivity in the young to
neurotoxic effects. Overall, findings of
increased sensitivity in juvenile animals
in pyrethroid studies are rare. Therefore,
the residual concern for the postnatal
effects is reduced.
• High-dose LD50 studies (studies
assessing what dose results in lethality
to 50% of the tested population) in the
scientific literature indicate that
pyrethroids can result in increased
quantitative sensitivity to juvenile
animals. Examination of
pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic
data indicates that the sensitivity
observed at high doses is related to
pyrethroid age-dependent
pharmacokinetics—the activity of
enzymes associated with the
metabolism of pyrethroids.
Furthermore, a rat physiologically-based
pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model predicts
a 3-fold increase of pyrethroid
concentration in juvenile brain
compared to adults at high doses.
• In vitro pharmacodynamic data and
in vivo data indicate that adult and
juvenile rats have similar responses to
pyrethroids at low doses and therefore
juvenile sensitivity is not expected at
relevant environmental exposures.
Further, data also show that the rat is a
conservative model compared to the
human based on species-specific
pharmacodynamics of homologous
sodium channel isoforms.
iii. There are no residual uncertainties
with regard to dietary exposure. The
dietary exposure assessments are based
on highly conservative residue levels for
the mosquito adulticide use and for the
FHE uses. Furthermore, conservative,
upper-bound assumptions were used to
determine exposure through drinking
water and residential sources, such that
these exposures have not been
underestimated.
Taking all of this information into
account, EPA has reduced the FQPA SF
for women of child-bearing age because
there is no evidence in the over 70
guideline toxicity studies submitted to
the Agency that pyrethroids directly
impact developing fetuses. In addition,
none of the studies show any
indications of fetal toxicity at doses that
do not cause maternal toxicity. Because
there remains some uncertainty as to
juvenile sensitivity due to the findings
in the high-dose LD50 studies, EPA is
retaining a 3x FQPA SF for infants and
children less than 6 years of age. By age
6, the metabolic system is expected to
be at or near adult levels thus reducing
concerns for potential age-dependent
sensitivity related to pharmacokinetics;
therefore for children over 6, a 1x factor
E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM
29OCR1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 209 / Wednesday, October 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
is appropriate. Although EPA is seeking
additional data to further characterize
the potential neurotoxicity for
pyrethroids, EPA has reliable data that
show that reducing the FQPA SF to 3x
will protect the safety of infants and
children less than 6 years old. These
data include:
a. Data from developmental and
reproductive toxicity guideline studies
with prallethrin that show no
sensitivity.
b. Data showing that the potential
sensitivity at high doses is likely due to
pharmacokinetics.
c. A rat PBPK model predicting a 3fold increase of pyrethroid
concentration in the juvenile brain
compared to adults at high doses due to
age-dependent pharmacokinetics.
d. Data indicating that the rat is a
conservative model compared to the
human based on species-specific
pharmacodynamics of homologous
sodium channel isoforms.
iv. Although EPA has required
additional data on transferable residues
from treated turf for prallethrin, EPA is
confident that it has not underestimated
turf exposure due to the
conservativeness of the default turf
transfer value and conservative
assumptions in the short-term turf
assessment procedures (e.g., assuming
residues do not degrade over the thirty
day assessment period and assuming
high-end activities on turf for every day
of the assessment period). The
additional data on turf transferable
residues have been required in case
requirement of exposure assessments is
needed on the future, and to further
EPA’s general understanding of the
availability of pesticide residues on turf.
For several reasons, EPA has
determined that reliable data show that
a 3x factor is protective of the safety of
infants and children less than 6 years of
age. First, it is likely that the extensive
guideline studies with pyrethroids,
which indicate that increased sensitivity
in juvenile animals in pyrethroid
studies is rare, better characterize the
potential sensitivity of juvenile animals
than the LD50 studies. The high doses
that produced juvenile sensitivity in the
literature studies are well above normal
dietary or residential exposure levels of
pyrethroids to juveniles and lower
levels of exposure anticipated from
dietary and residential uses are not
expected to overwhelm the juvenile’s
ability to metabolize pyrethroids, as
occurred with the high doses used in
the literature studies. The fact that a
greater sensitivity to the neurotoxicity of
pyrethroids is not found in guideline
studies following in utero exposures
(based on more than 70 studies for 24
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Oct 28, 2014
Jkt 235001
pyrethroids) supports this conclusion,
despite the relatively high doses used in
the studies. Second, in vitro data
indicate similar pharmacodynamic
response to pyrethroids between
juvenile and adult rats. Finally, as
indicated, pharmacokinetic modeling
only predicts a 3x difference between
juveniles and adults. Therefore, the
FQPA SF of 3x is protective of potential
juvenile sensitivity.
Specific information about the
reevaluation of the FQPA SF for
pyrethroids may be found in document
ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0746–
0011.
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. Acute aggregate risk from
exposure to prallethrin results from
exposure to residues in food and
drinking water alone. The acute dietary
exposure analysis included both food
and drinking water; therefore, acute
aggregate risk estimates are equivalent
to the acute dietary risk estimates. The
acute risk estimate for the general U.S.
population is 10% of the aPAD. The
population subgroup with the highest
acute dietary risk estimate is children 1–
2, which uses 76% of the aPAD. Acute
aggregate risk is not of concern for the
general U.S. population or any other
population subgroup.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit,
there is no increase in hazard with
increasing dose duration; therefore, the
acute aggregate assessment is protective
of potential chronic aggregate
exposures.
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). The short-term
aggregate risk assessments resulted in
MOEs of 620 for children, and 1,600 for
adult females and the general U.S.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
64329
population. The adult and children’s
MOEs are greater than their respective
LOCs of 100 and 300. As a result, the
short-term aggregate risk estimates are
not of concern for the general U.S.
population or any population subgroup.
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).
Because no intermediate-term adverse
effect was identified, prallethrin is not
expected to pose an intermediate-term
risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the data
summarized in Units III.A. and
III.C.1.iii., EPA has concluded that
prallethrin is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
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 prallethrin
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
A method based on gas
chromatography with electron capture
detection (GC/ECD), ID #262, is
adequate for the enforcement of
tolerances for residues of prallethrin in
or on crop commodities. The reported
limits of quantitation (LOQs) are 0.01 to
0.10 ppm, depending on the
commodity. The limits of detection
(LODs) were reported to be 0.004 to 0.06
ppm, depending on the commodity.
Multiresidue methods testing for
prallethrin have not been conducted,
and is not required, based on previous
Agency discussions with the petitioner
on November 3, 2010.
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 section 408(b)(4) of FFDCA.
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM
29OCR1
64330
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 209 / Wednesday, October 29, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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,
section 408(b)(4) of FFDCA requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level. The Codex has not
established a MRL for prallethrin.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of the insecticide
prallethrin, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on all raw
agricultural commodities and processed
food from use of prallethrin in food
handling establishments where food and
food products are held, processed,
prepared and/or served, or as a widearea mosquito adulticide at 1.0 part per
million (ppm). Compliance with the
tolerance level specified is to be
determined by measuring only
prallethrin, 2-methyl-4-oxo-3-(2-propyn1-yl)-2-cyclopenten-1-yl-2,2-dimethyl-3(2-methyl-1-propen-1yl)cyclopropanecarboxylate.
EPA is revising 40 CFR 180.545 to
clarify the tolerance. EPA is merging
paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) together into a
new paragraph (a). EPA is removing
paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) as they contain
language that is more appropriately
regulated under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
as use directions on the label.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes tolerances
under section 408(d) of FFDCA 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:58 Oct 28, 2014
Jkt 235001
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 section 408(d) of FFDCA, 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 action 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 section
408(n)(4) of FFDCA. 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).
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: October 17, 2014.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting 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. Revise § 180.545 to read as follows:
§ 180.545 Prallethrin; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of the
insecticide prallethrin, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on all
raw agricultural commodities and
processed food from use of prallethrin
in food handling establishments where
food and food products are held,
processed, prepared and/or served, or as
a wide-area mosquito adulticide at 1.0
part per million (ppm). Compliance
with the tolerance level specified is to
be determined by measuring only
prallethrin, 2-methyl-4-oxo-3-(2-propyn1-yl)-2-cyclopenten-1-yl-2,2-dimethyl-3(2-methyl-1-propen-1yl)cyclopropanecarboxylate.
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues.
[Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2014–25732 Filed 10–28–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
VII. Congressional Review Act
[Docket No. 140822715–4882–02]
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).
RIN 0648–BE37
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
Provisions; Fisheries of the
Northeastern United States; Tilefish
Fishery; 2015–2017 Specifications
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
NMFS issues final
specifications for the commercial
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\29OCR1.SGM
29OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 209 (Wednesday, October 29, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64322-64330]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25732]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0659; FRL-9917-30]
Prallethrin; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of the
insecticide prallethrin, including its metabolites and degradates, in
or on all food commodities from use of prallethrin in food handling
establishments where food and food products are held, processed,
prepared and/or served, or as a wide-area mosquito adulticide at 1.0
part per million (ppm). McLaughlin Gormley King Company requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective October 29, 2014. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before December 29, 2014,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0659, 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: Daniel J. Rosenblatt, Registration
Division (RD) (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.
[[Page 64323]]
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0659 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
December 29, 2014. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0659, by one of
the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of October 25, 2013 (78 FR 63938) (FRL-
9901-96), EPA issued a document pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA,
21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
2F8090) by McLaughlin Gormley King Company, 8810 Tenth Avenue,
Minneapolis, MN 55427. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.545 be
amended by establishing a tolerance of 1.0 ppm for residues of the
insecticide prallethrin, including its metabolites and degradates, in
or on all raw agricultural commodities and processed food, and food
products in food handling establishments where food and food products
are held, processed, prepared and/or served, or as a wide-area mosquito
adulticide. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared
by McLaughlin Gormley King Company, the registrant, which is available
in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments
received in response to the notice of filing.
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 section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, and the factors
specified in section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, 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 prallethrin including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with prallethrin
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.
Prallethrin is a member of the pyrethroid class of insecticides.
Pyrethroids have historically been classified into two groups, Type I
and Type II, based upon chemical structure and neurotoxicological
effect. Type I pyrethroids lack an alpha-cyano moiety and induce a
syndrome consisting of aggressive sparring, altered sensitivity to
external stimuli, and fine tremor progressing to whole-body tremor and
prostration in rats. These Type I pyrethroid-specific behaviors are
collectively described as the T-syndrome. Type II pyrethroids contain
an alpha-cyano moiety and produce a syndrome that includes pawing,
burrowing, salivation, and coarse tremors leading to choreoathetosis in
rats. These Type II pyrethroid-specific behaviors are collectively
described as the CS-syndrome (Verschoyle and Aldridge 1980; Lawrence
and Casida 1982). Prallethrin is structurally similar to Type I
pyrethroids. The adverse outcome pathway (AOP) shared by pyrethroids
involves the ability to interact with voltage-gated sodium channels
(VGSCs) in the central and peripheral nervous system, leading to
changes in neuron firing, and ultimately neurotoxicity.
Prallethrin has been evaluated for a variety of toxic effects in
experimental toxicity studies. Neurotoxicity was observed throughout
the database and is the most sensitive endpoint. Effects were seen
across species, sexes, and routes of administration. In the acute rat
neurotoxicity study, decreased exploratory behavior was seen at the
time of peak effect. Reduced motor activity and transient tremors were
also observed in the study. In the subchronic rat neurotoxicity study,
a higher arousal rate was observed in animals at the highest dose
tested. Clinical signs of neurotoxicity were also observed in other
toxicity studies (subchronic and chronic oral studies in dogs,
developmental toxicity studies in the rat and rabbit, 21-day dermal and
28-day inhalation studies in rats). No neurotoxic effects were observed
in rats in the chronic toxicity study.
Effects were also observed in the liver (rats, mice, and dogs),
heart (dogs), and thyroid gland (rats). Some effects were also seen in
the kidney (mice and rats). However, neurotoxicity was the most
sensitive endpoint in the toxicology database, and other effects were
generally seen in the presence of neurotoxicity and/or at higher doses.
Liver effects observed included increased weight, elevated serum
cholesterol and alkaline phosphatase
[[Page 64324]]
activity, centrilobular hepatocyte vacuolation, histiocytic
infiltration, enlarged liver, and perilobular hepatocellular
hypertrophy. In dogs, myocardial fiber degeneration was seen in females
in the subchronic study at the highest dose tested. Heart effects were
also seen in one mid-dose female in the chronic study (hemorrhage and
red discoloration). However, there was no dose response for the
observed heart lesions in the study. Thyroid effects were observed in
rats and consisted of increases in the number of small follicles and
follicular cell hypertrophy and hyperplasia. The thyroid effects were
seen in short-term studies in the presence of liver effects. Kidney
effects observed were increased weights and histopathology.
Developmental and reproduction studies are available for
prallethrin. There was no evidence of increased quantitative or
qualitative susceptibility in any of the studies. In the developmental
studies, no toxic effects were noted in fetuses up to the highest doses
tested. Maternal effects in the studies included tremors, salivation,
exaggerated reflexes, and chromorhinorrhea. In the reproduction study,
decreased pup body weights were seen during the lactation period.
Effects seen in parental animals were decreased body weights and body
weight gains, increased liver weights and microscopic findings in the
liver, kidney, thyroid, and pituitary.
Prallethrin is classified as ``Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to
Humans.'' No tumors were observed in rat and mouse carcinogenicity
studies up to the highest doses tested. In both the rat and mouse
studies, the animals could have tolerated higher dose levels; however,
EPA determined that dose levels were adequate to assess potential
carcinogenicity.
Prallethrin tested negative in the majority of the genotoxicity
studies. It also tested negative in an in vitro chromosomal aberration
study in Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO K1) cells without metabolic
activation, but tested positive at all doses with metabolic activation.
However, clastogenicity was not clearly dose-related, was seen at
nontoxic and slightly toxic doses, and was not expressed in in vivo
studies and structure-activity comparisons with the other pyrethroids
revealed no correlations with clastogenicity. Other gene mutation,
chromosomal aberration, and unscheduled DNA synthesis (UDS) studies
were negative; therefore, there is no concern for genotoxicity.
Acute lethality studies conducted with prallethrin indicate
moderate acute toxicity via the oral and inhalation routes of
administration (Category II) and low acute toxicity via the dermal
route (Categories IV). It is not irritating to the skin (Category IV)
but is minimally irritating to the eye (Category IV). It is not a
dermal sensitizer. The weight of evidence from the available guideline,
non-guideline, mechanism of action, and pharmacokinetics studies
supports characterizing the toxicological profile of pyrethroids,
including prallethrin, as being rapid in onset and associated with
acute, peak exposures. Also, there is no apparent increase in hazard
from repeated/chronic exposures to prallethrin.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by prallethrin 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 in the document
titled ``Prallethrin: Human Health Risk Assessment for the Tolerance
Petition to Amend the Section 3 Mosquito Adulticide Registration to
Include Use of the Insecticide Over All Crops,'' dated September 15,
2014, by going to https://www.regulations.gov. The referenced document
is available in the docket established by this action, which is
described under ADDRESSES. Locate and click on the hyperlink for docket
ID number EPA-HQ-OPP- 2013-0659. Double-click on the document to view
the referenced information.
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 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 prallethrin used for
human risk assessment are shown in Tables 1 and 2 of this unit. Based
on the proposed use patterns for prallethrin, endpoints and points of
departure were selected for dietary (acute only), dermal, inhalation,
and incidental oral exposures.
For oral exposures (acute dietary and incidental oral), the
endpoint and POD were selected from a chronic dog study in which
neurotoxicity was observed within 4 weeks of dosing and was considered
to have potentially resulted from a single dose, based on a weight-of-
the-evidence. For dermal assessment, the endpoint was selected from the
route-specific 21-day dermal study in the rat, in which clinical signs
were observed within 1 to 3 days of dosing. The endpoints being used to
assess oral and dermal exposures are the same (neurotoxicity);
therefore, risks from those routes of exposure were combined. Although
the LOAEL for inhalation is also based on neurotoxicity, derivation of
the human equivalent concentrations (HECs) used for inhalation risk
assessment shows that assessing inhalation exposure based on the
portal-of-entry effects is protective of the systemic endpoints,
including neurotoxicity. As a result, inhalation exposure was not
combined with either the dermal or the oral routes of exposure.
A chronic dietary risk assessment was not conducted for
prallethrin. Given what is known about pyrethroid toxicokinetics/
dynamics, in general, and as there is no apparent increase in hazard
from repeated/chronic exposures to prallethrin, the acute dietary
exposure assessment is protective of chronic dietary exposures. Based
on the toxicity profile, intermediate- or long-term exposure
assessments were not conducted for adults or children.
[[Page 64325]]
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Prallethrin for Use in Dietary and Non-Occupational
Human Health Risk Assessments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure
Exposure/scenario and uncertainty/FQPA RfD, PAD, LOC for Study and toxicological effects
safety factors risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute Dietary (Children >=6 years NOAEL = 2.5 mg/kg/ Acute RfD = 0.025 Chronic dog study (capsule). LOAEL
old and Adults). day. mg/kg/day. = 5 mg/kg/day based on clinical
UFA = 10x........... aPAD= 0.025 mg/kg/ signs of neurotoxicity.
UFH = 10x........... day..
FQPA SF = 1x........
Acute Dietary (Children <6 years NOAEL = 2.5 mg/kg/ Acute RfD = 0.025
old). day. mg/kg/day.
UFA = 10x........... aPAD= 0.008 mg/kg/
UFH = 10x........... day.
FQPA SF = 3x........
Incidental Oral Short-Term (1 to NOAEL = 2.5 mg/kg/ Residential LOC for
30 days). day. MOE = 300.
UFA = 10x...........
UFH = 10x...........
FQPA SF = 3x........
Dermal Short-term (1 to 30 days) Dermal NOAEL = 30 mg/ Residential LOC for 21-day Dermal Rat. LOAEL = 150 mg/
(Children <6 years old). kg/day. MOE = 300. kg/day based on observed clinical
UFA = 10x........... signs of toxicity (fixation,
UFH = 10x........... abnormal gait, tremors,
FQPA SF = 3x........ sensitivity to external stimuli,
vocalization, twitching and
writhing spasms), all beginning
between days 1 and 3 of a 21-day
dermal study in rats.
Dermal Short-term (1 to 30 days) Dermal NOAEL = 30 mg/ Residential LOC for
(Children >=6 years old and kg/day. MOE = 100.
Adults). UFA = 10x...........
UFH = 10x...........
FQPA SF = 1x........
Inhalation Short-term (1 to 30 Inhalation NOAEL = Residential LOC for 28-Day Inhalation Rat. LOAEL =
days) (Children <6 years old). 0.001 mg/L. MOE = 100. 0.0044 mg/L based on irregular
UFA = 3x............ respiration, decreased
UFH = 10x........... spontaneous activity, salivation,
FQPA SF = 3x........ incontinence, and nasal
HEC/HED calculations discharge.
used for risk
assessment (see
below).
Inhalation Short-term (1 to 30 Inhalation NOAEL = Residential LOC for
days) (Children >=6 years old 0.001 mg/L. MOE = 30.
and Adults). UFA = 3x............
UFH = 10x...........
FQPA SF = 1x........
HEC/HED calculations
used for risk
assessment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
aPAD = acute population adjusted dose. FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. HEC = human equivalent concentration. HED =
human equivalent dose. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. LOC = level of concern. MOE = margin of
exposure. NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level. Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated
point that is derived from observed dose-response data and used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to
determine risk associated with lower environmentally relevant human exposures. 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).
Table 2--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Prallethrin for Use in Dietary and Non-Occupational
Human Health Risk Assessments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential HECs HEDs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential HECs and HEDs........ Handler/Outdoor Post- 0.00020 mg/L....... 0.006 mg/kg/day.
application.
Residential LOC for MOE = 100 Indoor Post- 0.00014 mg/L....... N/A.
(Children <6 years old). application without
air ventilation.
Residential LOC for MOE = 30 Indoor Post- Adults: 0.00004 mg/ N/A.
(Children >=6 years old and application with L.
Adults). air ventilation. Children: 0.00003
mg/L..
Bystander........... 0.00002 mg/L....... N/A.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 64326]]
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: ``Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans.''
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HEC = human equivalent concentration. HED = human equivalent dose. Kg = kilogram. LOC = level of concern. L =
Liter. Mg = milligram. MOE = margin of exposure. N/A = Not applicable.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to prallethrin, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing prallethrin tolerances in 40 CFR
180.545. Acute and chronic aggregate dietary (food and drinking water)
exposure assessments were conducted using the Dietary Exposure
Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database
(DEEM-FCID) Version 3.16. This software uses 2003-2008 food consumption
data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health
and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/
WWEIA).
i. Acute exposure. The acute dietary risk assessment is partially
refined, and is based on the assumption that as a result of potential
use in food handling establishments (FHEs), most commodities will have
residues at one-half the limit of quantification (LOQ) of the
analytical method used in the FHE residue trials (0.05 ppm). It was
also based on the assumptions that all flour food forms will contain
residues at the highest level found in the FHE residue trials on flour,
and that tree nuts and peanuts will contain residues at the highest
level found in the FHE residue trials on peanuts. Based on residue
data, the highest residue value (0.0045 ppm) was used for all crops as
a result of treatment from the mosquito adulticide use.
The percent FHE value of 4.65% was applied to the FHE residue
values, and the adulticide residues were incorporated at a level of
100% (i.e., all foods could potentially have residues resulting from
the mosquito adulticide use). Residues from food handling (modified by
the % FHE estimate) and mosquito adulticide treatments were combined.
ii. Chronic exposure. A chronic dietary risk assessment was not
conducted. However, a chronic exposure assessment was conducted to
determine background levels of dietary exposure for estimating
aggregate risk. The exposure estimates are based on the highest residue
value from the FHE residue trials for tree nuts, peanuts, and all flour
food forms; and on the LOQ of the method used in the FHE trials (0.10
ppm). The data were treated in the same manner as the data in the acute
dietary risk assessment, with the exception that the average residue
value from the adulticide trials (0.0007 ppm) was used instead of the
highest residue value (0.0045 ppm).
For the chronic exposure assessment, EPA applied a percent FHE
value of 4.65% to the FHE residue values and assumed 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) for the proposed mosquito adulticide use, just as we have
done for the acute exposure assessment. This value is considered to be
an overestimate of the potential for the mosquito adulticide to drift
onto growing crops. Residues from the FHE and adulticide uses were then
combined. Processing factors were not used because the assumption was
made that foods in an FHE could be treated after processing.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that prallethrin does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that EPA to states that the Agency
may use data on the actual percent of food treated for assessing
chronic dietary risk only if:
Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a
valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop
is likely to contain the pesticide residue.
Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
Condition c: Data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area. In addition, the
Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any estimates used. To
provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate of PCT as required
by section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA, EPA may require registrants to submit
data on PCT.
In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States
Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service
(USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and the National Pesticide Use
Database for the chemical/crop combination for the most recent 6-7
years. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis. The
average PCT figure for each existing use is derived by combining
available public and private market survey data for that use, averaging
across all observations, and rounding to the nearest 5%, except for
those situations in which the average PCT is less than one. In those
cases, 1% is used as the average PCT and 2.5% is used as the maximum
PCT. EPA uses a maximum PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the highest observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available public and private market survey
data for the existing use and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%.
The Agency estimates a maximum 4.65% probability that a food a
person consumes contains residues as a result of treatment in an FHE at
some point with any pesticide (i.e., it is not specific to
prallethrin). This value was derived by taking into account the daily
probability of treatment and the percent of expenditures resulting in
potential residues in restaurants, commercial kitchens, food
warehouses, and food processors. For both the acute and chronic
assessments, this value was used for the FHE component of the residue
for all commodities with the exception of drinking water.
The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed in Unit
III.C.1.iv. have been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates
are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are
reliable and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that
the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an
underestimation. As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption
information and consumption information for significant subpopulations
is taken into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating
the exposure of significant subpopulations including
[[Page 64327]]
several regional groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's
risk assessment process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows
the Agency to be reasonably certain that no regional population is
exposed to residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency.
Other than the data available through national food consumption
surveys, EPA does not have available reliable information on the
regional consumption of food to which prallethrin may be applied in a
particular area.
Specific information on the methodology to estimate PCT can be
found in the document entitled ``Prallethrin: Upper Bound Estimate of
the Likelihood of Insecticide Residues on Food Resulting from Treatment
in Food Handling Establishments,'' dated September 7, 2014, by going to
https://www.regulations.gov.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for prallethrin. These simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of
prallethrin. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST), Tier II
Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/
EXAMS), and the Pesticide Flooded Application Model (PFAM), the surface
water estimated drinking water concentration (EDWC) value of 0.591
parts per billion (ppb) was used in the acute assessment and that the
annual average surface water EDWC value of 0.0375 ppb was used in the
chronic assessment.
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).
Prallethrin is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: A variety of residential pet,
indoor and outdoor uses for pests found on turf, and in homes and
commercial settings, including food handling establishments. However,
for purposes of this assessment, only registered residential products
and use sites with the highest application rates or percent active
ingredient (a.i.) were assessed because they are representative of the
worst case exposure scenarios for the exposed populations.
EPA assessed potential residential handler exposure scenarios
resulting from mixing/loading/applying sprays to lawns using hose-end
and backpack sprayers because exposure from treating lawns were higher
than from other application methods and sites. A quantitative
assessment was not required for handling of total release fogger
products since the labels state that the room/house must be vacated
immediately by the user once initiated.
EPA assessed post-application dermal exposure for adults and
children as well as incidental oral (i.e., hand-to-mouth) exposure for
children resulting from contact with residues deposited on turf and
indoor surfaces following application with aerial and truck-mounted
fogger mosquito vector control applications, hand-held spray
applications on turf and lawn, and indoor aerosol foggers,
respectively. Adult and child post-application inhalation exposure
resulting from both aerial and truck-mounted mosquito vector control
applications were also assessed. A quantitative post-application
inhalation exposure assessment was not performed for turf or indoor
aerosol foggers because inhalation exposure from these application
methods is anticipated to be negligible. 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.''
The Agency has determined that the pyrethroids and pyrethrins share
a common mechanism of toxicity (go to https://www.regulations.gov and
search under document ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0489-0006). The members
of this group share the ability to interact with voltage-gated sodium
channels ultimately leading to neurotoxicity. The cumulative risk
assessment for the pyrethroids/pyrethrins was published on November 9,
2011, and is available at https://www.regulations.gov under EPA-HQ-OPP-
2011-0746. No cumulative risks of concern were identified, allowing the
Agency to consider new uses for pyrethroids. For information regarding
EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of
toxicity, and to evaluate the cumulative effects of this class of
chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/reevaluation/pyrethroids-pyrethrins.html.
Prallethrin is included in the pyrethroids/pyrethrins cumulative
risk assessment. No dietary, residential or aggregate risk estimates of
concern have been identified in the single chemical assessment. In the
cumulative assessment, residential exposure was the greatest
contributor to the total exposure. An existing residential turf use for
prallethrin was evaluated to determine the potential contribution it
would have on the cumulative risk assessment. Although the turf use was
considered the main contributor for residential exposure, the turf
assessment indicated that exposure from turf would not impact the
residential component of the cumulative risk estimates for the
pyrethroids.
Therefore, since the proposed mosquito adulticide contributes far
less exposure than the registered turf uses, there will be no impact on
the residential component of the cumulative risk estimates.
Dietary exposures make a minor contribution to the total pyrethroid
exposure. The dietary exposure assessment performed in support of the
pyrethroid cumulative was much more highly refined than that performed
for prallethrin. In addition, for the prallethrin risk assessment, the
most sensitive apical endpoint in the prallethrin database was selected
to derive the POD. Further, the POD selected for prallethrin is
specific to prallethrin, whereas the POD selected for the cumulative
assessment was based on common mechanism of action data that are
appropriate for all 20 pyrethroids included in the cumulative
assessment. Dietary exposure to prallethrin residues resulting from the
proposed mosquito adulticide use over all crops will contribute very
little to the dietary exposure to prallethrin alone; therefore, the
proposed use will make an insignificant contribution to dietary risk to
the pyrethroids as a whole.
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,
[[Page 64328]]
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. The prallethrin toxicity
database includes developmental toxicity studies in the rat and rabbit,
and a reproduction study in the rat. No evidence of increased
qualitative or quantitative susceptibility was noted in any of these
studies. This lack of susceptibility is consistent with the results of
guideline developmental and reproduction studies with other pyrethroid
pesticides.
High-dose studies assessing what dose results in lethality to 50%
of the tested population (LD50) in the scientific literature
indicate that pyrethroid exposure can result in increased quantitative
sensitivity in the young, specifically in the form of neurotoxicity.
Examination of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data indicates that
the sensitivity observed at high doses is related to pyrethroid age-
dependent pharmacokinetics, which is the activity of enzymes associated
with the metabolism of pyrethroids. With otherwise equivalent
administered doses for adults and juveniles, predictive pharmacokinetic
models indicate that the differential adult-juvenile pharmacokinetics
will result in a 3x greater dose at the target organ in juveniles
compared to adults. No evidence of increased quantitative or
qualitative susceptibility was seen in the pyrethroid scientific
literature related to pharmacodynamics (the effect of pyrethroids at
the target tissue) both with regard to interspecies differences between
rats and humans and to differences between juveniles and adults.
Specifically, there are in vitro pharmacodynamic data and in vivo data
indicating similar responses between adult and juvenile rats at low
doses and data indicating that the rat is a conservative model compared
to the human based on species-specific pharmacodynamics of homologous
sodium channel isoforms in rats and humans.
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 3x for infants and children less than 6 years
of age. For the general population, including children greater than 6
years of age, EPA is reducing the FQPA SF to 1x. These decisions are
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicology database for prallethrin is considered complete
with respect to guideline toxicity studies for prallethrin; however,
the Agency lacks additional information to fully characterize the
potential for juvenile sensitivity to the neurotoxic effects of
pyrethroids. In light of the literature studies indicating a
possibility of increased sensitivity in juvenile rats at high doses,
EPA identified a need, and requested proposals for, additional non-
guideline studies to evaluate the potential for sensitivity in juvenile
rats. A group of pyrethroid registrants is currently conducting those
studies. Pending the results of those studies, however, the available
toxicity studies for prallethrin can be used to characterize toxic
effects including potential developmental and reproductive toxicity, as
well as neurotoxicity. Acceptable developmental toxicity studies in
rats and rabbits, reproduction studies in rats, neurotoxicity studies
(acute, subchronic, and developmental) in rats are available. In
addition, route-specific dermal and inhalation toxicity studies are
available. The Immunotoxicity study has been waived. As discussed in
Unit IV.D.2., EPA concludes that the 3x FQPA SF will be adequate for
protecting infants and children less than 6 years old.
ii. After reviewing the extensive body of data and peer-reviewed
literature on pyrethroids, the Agency has reached a number of
conclusions regarding fetal and juvenile sensitivity for pyrethroids,
including the following:
Based on an evaluation of over 70 guideline toxicity
studies for 24 pyrethroids submitted to the Agency, including prenatal
developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits, and pre- and
postnatal multi-generation reproduction toxicity studies and DNTs in
rats in support of pyrethroid registrations, there is no evidence that
pyrethroids directly impact developing fetuses. None of the studies
show any indications of fetal toxicity at doses that do not cause
maternal toxicity.
Increased susceptibility was seen in offspring animals in
the DNT study with the pyrethroid zeta-cypermethrin (decreased pup body
weights) and DNT and reproduction studies with another pyrethroid beta-
cyfluthrin (decreased body weights and tremors). However, the
reductions in body weight and the other non-specific effects occur at
higher doses than neurotoxicity, the effect of concern for pyrethroids.
The available developmental and reproduction guideline studies in rats
with zeta-cypermethrin did not show increased sensitivity in the young
to neurotoxic effects. Overall, findings of increased sensitivity in
juvenile animals in pyrethroid studies are rare. Therefore, the
residual concern for the postnatal effects is reduced.
High-dose LD50 studies (studies assessing what
dose results in lethality to 50% of the tested population) in the
scientific literature indicate that pyrethroids can result in increased
quantitative sensitivity to juvenile animals. Examination of
pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data indicates that the sensitivity
observed at high doses is related to pyrethroid age-dependent
pharmacokinetics--the activity of enzymes associated with the
metabolism of pyrethroids. Furthermore, a rat physiologically-based
pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model predicts a 3-fold increase of pyrethroid
concentration in juvenile brain compared to adults at high doses.
In vitro pharmacodynamic data and in vivo data indicate
that adult and juvenile rats have similar responses to pyrethroids at
low doses and therefore juvenile sensitivity is not expected at
relevant environmental exposures. Further, data also show that the rat
is a conservative model compared to the human based on species-specific
pharmacodynamics of homologous sodium channel isoforms.
iii. There are no residual uncertainties with regard to dietary
exposure. The dietary exposure assessments are based on highly
conservative residue levels for the mosquito adulticide use and for the
FHE uses. Furthermore, conservative, upper-bound assumptions were used
to determine exposure through drinking water and residential sources,
such that these exposures have not been underestimated.
Taking all of this information into account, EPA has reduced the
FQPA SF for women of child-bearing age because there is no evidence in
the over 70 guideline toxicity studies submitted to the Agency that
pyrethroids directly impact developing fetuses. In addition, none of
the studies show any indications of fetal toxicity at doses that do not
cause maternal toxicity. Because there remains some uncertainty as to
juvenile sensitivity due to the findings in the high-dose
LD50 studies, EPA is retaining a 3x FQPA SF for infants and
children less than 6 years of age. By age 6, the metabolic system is
expected to be at or near adult levels thus reducing concerns for
potential age-dependent sensitivity related to pharmacokinetics;
therefore for children over 6, a 1x factor
[[Page 64329]]
is appropriate. Although EPA is seeking additional data to further
characterize the potential neurotoxicity for pyrethroids, EPA has
reliable data that show that reducing the FQPA SF to 3x will protect
the safety of infants and children less than 6 years old. These data
include:
a. Data from developmental and reproductive toxicity guideline
studies with prallethrin that show no sensitivity.
b. Data showing that the potential sensitivity at high doses is
likely due to pharmacokinetics.
c. A rat PBPK model predicting a 3-fold increase of pyrethroid
concentration in the juvenile brain compared to adults at high doses
due to age-dependent pharmacokinetics.
d. Data indicating that the rat is a conservative model compared to
the human based on species-specific pharmacodynamics of homologous
sodium channel isoforms.
iv. Although EPA has required additional data on transferable
residues from treated turf for prallethrin, EPA is confident that it
has not underestimated turf exposure due to the conservativeness of the
default turf transfer value and conservative assumptions in the short-
term turf assessment procedures (e.g., assuming residues do not degrade
over the thirty day assessment period and assuming high-end activities
on turf for every day of the assessment period). The additional data on
turf transferable residues have been required in case requirement of
exposure assessments is needed on the future, and to further EPA's
general understanding of the availability of pesticide residues on
turf.
For several reasons, EPA has determined that reliable data show
that a 3x factor is protective of the safety of infants and children
less than 6 years of age. First, it is likely that the extensive
guideline studies with pyrethroids, which indicate that increased
sensitivity in juvenile animals in pyrethroid studies is rare, better
characterize the potential sensitivity of juvenile animals than the
LD50 studies. The high doses that produced juvenile
sensitivity in the literature studies are well above normal dietary or
residential exposure levels of pyrethroids to juveniles and lower
levels of exposure anticipated from dietary and residential uses are
not expected to overwhelm the juvenile's ability to metabolize
pyrethroids, as occurred with the high doses used in the literature
studies. The fact that a greater sensitivity to the neurotoxicity of
pyrethroids is not found in guideline studies following in utero
exposures (based on more than 70 studies for 24 pyrethroids) supports
this conclusion, despite the relatively high doses used in the studies.
Second, in vitro data indicate similar pharmacodynamic response to
pyrethroids between juvenile and adult rats. Finally, as indicated,
pharmacokinetic modeling only predicts a 3x difference between
juveniles and adults. Therefore, the FQPA SF of 3x is protective of
potential juvenile sensitivity.
Specific information about the reevaluation of the FQPA SF for
pyrethroids may be found in document ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0746-
0011.
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. Acute aggregate risk from exposure to prallethrin
results from exposure to residues in food and drinking water alone. The
acute dietary exposure analysis included both food and drinking water;
therefore, acute aggregate risk estimates are equivalent to the acute
dietary risk estimates. The acute risk estimate for the general U.S.
population is 10% of the aPAD. The population subgroup with the highest
acute dietary risk estimate is children 1-2, which uses 76% of the
aPAD. Acute aggregate risk is not of concern for the general U.S.
population or any other population subgroup.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit, there is no increase in hazard with increasing dose duration;
therefore, the acute aggregate assessment is protective of potential
chronic aggregate exposures.
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). The short-
term aggregate risk assessments resulted in MOEs of 620 for children,
and 1,600 for adult females and the general U.S. population. The adult
and children's MOEs are greater than their respective LOCs of 100 and
300. As a result, the short-term aggregate risk estimates are not of
concern for the general U.S. population or any population subgroup.
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). Because no intermediate-term adverse effect was identified,
prallethrin is not expected to pose an intermediate-term risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the data
summarized in Units III.A. and III.C.1.iii., EPA has concluded that
prallethrin is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
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 prallethrin residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
A method based on gas chromatography with electron capture
detection (GC/ECD), ID #262, is adequate for the enforcement of
tolerances for residues of prallethrin in or on crop commodities. The
reported limits of quantitation (LOQs) are 0.01 to 0.10 ppm, depending
on the commodity. The limits of detection (LODs) were reported to be
0.004 to 0.06 ppm, depending on the commodity. Multiresidue methods
testing for prallethrin have not been conducted, and is not required,
based on previous Agency discussions with the petitioner on November 3,
2010.
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 section
408(b)(4) of FFDCA. The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
[[Page 64330]]
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, section
408(b)(4) of FFDCA requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level. The Codex has not established a MRL for
prallethrin.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of the
insecticide prallethrin, including its metabolites and degradates, in
or on all raw agricultural commodities and processed food from use of
prallethrin in food handling establishments where food and food
products are held, processed, prepared and/or served, or as a wide-area
mosquito adulticide at 1.0 part per million (ppm). Compliance with the
tolerance level specified is to be determined by measuring only
prallethrin, 2-methyl-4-oxo-3-(2-propyn-1-yl)-2-cyclopenten-1-yl-2,2-
dimethyl-3-(2-methyl-1-propen-1-yl)cyclopropanecarboxylate.
EPA is revising 40 CFR 180.545 to clarify the tolerance. EPA is
merging paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) together into a new paragraph (a).
EPA is removing paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) as they contain language that
is more appropriately regulated under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) as use directions on the label.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes tolerances under section 408(d) of FFDCA 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 section 408(d) of FFDCA, 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 action 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 section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. 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: October 17, 2014.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting 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. Revise Sec. 180.545 to read as follows:
Sec. 180.545 Prallethrin; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
insecticide prallethrin, including its metabolites and degradates, in
or on all raw agricultural commodities and processed food from use of
prallethrin in food handling establishments where food and food
products are held, processed, prepared and/or served, or as a wide-area
mosquito adulticide at 1.0 part per million (ppm). Compliance with the
tolerance level specified is to be determined by measuring only
prallethrin, 2-methyl-4-oxo-3-(2-propyn-1-yl)-2-cyclopenten-1-yl-2,2-
dimethyl-3-(2-methyl-1-propen-1-yl)cyclopropanecarboxylate.
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2014-25732 Filed 10-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P