Pyrimethanil; Pesticide Tolerances, 7971-7975 [2015-02949]
Download as PDF
7971
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 30 / Friday, February 13, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
WEST VIRGINIA—1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS
[Primary and secondary]
Classification
Designation a
Designated Area
Date 1
*
*
*
*
Martinsburg, WV-Hagerstown, MD:
Berkeley County ..........................................................................................
*
*
*
*
11/25/14
*
Date 2
Type
Type
*
*
*
*
Attainment.
*
a Includes
Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
1 This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted.
2 This date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted.
*
*
*
*
*
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Lewis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; main telephone
number: (703) 305–7090; email address:
RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2015–02851 Filed 2–12–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0530; FRL–9922–07]
I. General Information
Pyrimethanil; Pesticide Tolerances
A. Does this action apply to me?
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
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).
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes a
tolerance for residues of pyrimethanil in
or on pomegranate at 5.0 parts per
million (ppm). Janssen PMP requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
February 13, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before April 14, 2015, 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–2014–0530, 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.
Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:45 Feb 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
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 Publishing Office’s eCFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/
text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/
Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2014–0530 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before April 14, 2015. 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–
2014–0530, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of December
17, 2014 (79 FR 75107) (FRL–9918–90),
EPA issued a document pursuant to
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
7972
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 30 / Friday, February 13, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 3F8213) by
Janssen PMP, Janssen Pharmaceutica
NV, 1125 Trenton-Harbourton Rd
Titusville, NJ 08560–0200. The petition
requested that the 40 CFR 180.518 be
amended by establishing a tolerance for
residues of the fungicide pyrimethanil
in or on pomegranate at 5.0 parts per
million (ppm). That document
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Janssen PMP, 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 DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. . . .’’
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for pyrimethanil
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with pyrimethanil 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
11:18 Feb 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
infants and children. Pyrimethanil is of
low acute lethality by the oral, dermal,
and inhalation routes. It is a slight eye
irritant, is not irritating to the skin, and
it is not a dermal sensitizer. A single
oral dose of 1,000 milligram/kilogram
(mg/kg) produced a number of acute
signs of neurotoxicity, including ataxia,
dilated pupils, and decreases in motor
activity, hind limb grip strength, and
body temperature. However, there was
no evidence of neurotoxicity with
repeated dosing in a subchronic
neurotoxicity study in rats. The major
target organs of repeated oral exposure
were the liver, kidney, and the thyroid.
These effects were accompanied by
decreased body weight. Reproductive
toxicity was not observed, and
developmental effects (e.g., decreased
fetal weight, retarded ossification, extra
ribs) were observed only at maternally
toxic doses. Special short-term exposure
studies demonstrated increased liver
uridine diphosphate glucuronosyl
transferase (UDPGT) activity leading to
decreases in thyroid hormones (T3, T4)
and compensatory increases in thyroidstimulating hormone (TSH) in adult
rats.
Thyroid adenomas were seen in rats
following long-term exposure, and it
was concluded that they were mediated
via disruption of the thyroid/pituitary
axis. There were no concerns for
mutagenicity. The EPA has classified
pyrimethanil as ‘‘Not Likely To Be
Carcinogenic To Humans At Doses That
Do Not Alter Rat Thyroid Hormone
Homeostasis.’’ This decision was based
on the following:
1. There were treatment-related
increases in thyroid follicular cell
tumors in male and female SpragueDawley rats at doses which were
considered adequate to assess
carcinogenicity; however, rats are
substantially more sensitive than
humans are to the development of
thyroid follicular cell tumors in
response to thyroid hormone imbalance.
2. There were no treatment-related
tumors seen in male or female CD–1
mice at doses which were considered
adequate to assess carcinogenicity.
3. There is no mutagenicity concern
and there is no evidence for thyroid
carcinogenesis mediated through a
mutagenic mode of action.
4. The non-neoplastic toxicological
evidence (i.e., thyroid growth, thyroid
hormonal changes) indicated that
pyrimethanil was inducing a disruption
in the thyroid-pituitary hormonal status.
The overall weight-of-evidence was
considered sufficient to indicate that
pyrimethanil induced thyroid follicular
tumors through a non-linear, antithyroid
mode of action.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
For these reasons, EPA determined
that quantification of carcinogenic risk
is not required and that the no observed
adverse effect level (NOAEL) (17 mg/kg/
day) established for deriving the chronic
reference dose (cPAD) would be
protective of cancer effects. Due to the
non-linear mode of action of
pyrimethanil, exposure at the NOAEL is
not expected to alter thyroid hormone
homeostasis nor result in thyroid tumor
formation.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by pyrimethanil as well
as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies are discussed in the
final rule published in the Federal
Register of August 1, 2012 (77 FR
45499) (FRL–9354–7).
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which no adverse effects are
observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for pyrimethanil used for
human risk assessment is discussed in
Unit III. B. of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of August 1, 2012
(77 FR 45500) (FRL–9354–7).
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 30 / Friday, February 13, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to pyrimethanil, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing pyrimethanil tolerances in 40
CFR 180.518. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from pyrimethanil in food as
follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide,
if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1-day or single
exposure.
Such effects were identified for
pyrimethanil. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food
consumption information from the
United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) 2003–2008 National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We
Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As
to residue levels in food, EPA assumed
default processing factors (as necessary),
empirical processing factors for orange
and apple juice, tolerance-level
residues, and 100 percent crop treated
(PCT) for all commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA 2003–2008 NHNES/
WWEIA. As to residue levels in food,
EPA assumed default processing factors
(as necessary), empirical processing
factors for orange and apple juice,
tolerance-level residues, and 100 PCT
for all commodities.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that pyrimethanil should be
classified as ‘‘Not Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans at Doses That
Do Not Alter Rat Thyroid Hormone
Homeostasis’’. Therefore a separate
cancer exposure assessment was not
performed.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did
not use anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for pyrimethanil. Tolerance-level
residues and/or 100 PCT were assumed
for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for pyrimethanil in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
pyrimethanil. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
VerDate Sep<11>2014
11:18 Feb 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI–
GROW) models, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of
pyrimethanil for acute exposures are
estimated to be 86.5 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 4.8 ppb for
ground water. For chronic exposures for
non-cancer assessments, they are
estimated to be 29.4 ppb for surface
water and 4.8 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model.
For acute dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration value of 86.5 ppb
was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water.
For chronic dietary risk assessment,
the water concentration of value 29.4
ppb was used to assess the contribution
to drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
Pyrimethanil is not registered for any
specific use patterns that would result
in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found pyrimethanil to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
pyrimethanil does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that pyrimethanil does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity
with other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
7973
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
Food Quality Protection Act Safety
Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this
provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
The prenatal and postnatal toxicology
database for pyrimethanil includes rat
and rabbit developmental toxicity
studies and a 2-generation reproduction
toxicity study in rats. As discussed in
Unit III.A., there was no evidence of
increased quantitative or qualitative
susceptibility of fetuses or offspring
following exposure to pyrimethanil in
these studies.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for
pyrimethanil is complete.
ii. Although there is evidence of
neurotoxicity in the acute neurotoxicity
study, concern is low since effects were
only seen at the limit dose, effects are
well-characterized with clearly
established NOAEL/LOAEL values, and
the selected endpoints are protective for
the observed effects. The thyroid has
been shown to be one of the target
organs in adult animals for
pyrimethanil-induced toxicity thus
raising a potential concern for thyroid
toxicity in the young. EPA, however
concluded that there is no concern for
thyroid toxicity in the young based on
the following weight of evidence
considerations: The effects seen on the
thyroid and the liver database, while
treatment-related, are not severe in
nature; and in each of the studies that
show an effect on thyroid hormone
levels, as well as in all studies chosen
for PODs selection, there is a wide dose
spread (∼10-fold difference between
NOELs and LOAELs) which provides a
measure of protection for any potential
effects linked to decreased thyroid
hormone levels in offspring.
iii. There is no evidence that
pyrimethanil results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
7974
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 30 / Friday, February 13, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study.
iv. The exposure databases are
sufficient to determine the nature/
magnitude of the residue in food and
dietary analyses are unlikely to
underestimate risk of exposure from
pyrimethanil.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to
pyrimethanil will occupy 38% of the
aPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to pyrimethanil
from food and water will utilize 78% of
the cPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses
for pyrimethanil.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term and
intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account short-and
intermediate-term residential exposure
plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). A short- and
intermediate-term adverse effect was
identified; however, pyrimethanil is not
registered for any use patterns that
would result in short-and/or
intermediate-term residential exposure.
Short-and intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on short-and
intermediate-term residential exposure
plus chronic dietary exposure. Because
there is no short-and intermediate-term
residential exposure and chronic dietary
exposure has already been assessed
under the appropriately protective
cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess short-term risk),
no further assessment of short-and
intermediate-term risk is necessary, and
EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk
assessment for evaluating short-and
intermediate-term risk for pyrimethanil.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
11:18 Feb 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. The Agency determined
that the thyroid tumors seen in rat
studies arise through a non-linear mode
of action and the NOAEL (17 mg/kg/
day) established for deriving the cRfD is
not expected to alter thyroid hormone
homeostasis nor result in thyroid tumor
formation. Thus, the chronic risk
assessment addresses any cancer risk.
Based on the results of chronic risk
assessment, EPA concludes that
aggregate exposure to pyrimethanil will
not cause a cancer risk.
5. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to pyrimethanil
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC)) is available to
enforce the tolerance expression. The
method may be requested from: Chief,
Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;
telephone number: (410) 305–2905;
email address: residuemethods@
epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established a MRL
for pyrimethanil in or on pomegranate.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established
for residues of pyrimethanil, in or on
pomegranate at 5.0 ppm.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes a tolerance
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this action 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 action does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This 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 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 action. In addition, this action
does not impose any enforceable duty or
contain any unfunded mandate as
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 30 / Friday, February 13, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
described under Title II of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (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
(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: February 6, 2015.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
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 § 180.518, alphabetically add the
commodity ‘‘Pomegranate’’ to the table
in paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
11:18 Feb 12, 2015
Jkt 235001
Dated: February 9, 2015.
Marilyn Tavenner,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services.
APPENDIX
42 CFR Parts 406, 407, and 408
CMS Rulings
[CMS–4176–NR]
Department of Health and Human
Services
Announcement of Ruling:
Implementing United States v. Windsor
for Purposes of Entitlement and
Enrollment in Medicare Hospital
Insurance and Supplementary Medical
Insurance
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Notice of CMS ruling.
AGENCY:
This document announces a
CMS Ruling that states the CMS policies
for implementing United States v.
Windsor (‘‘Windsor’’), in which the
Supreme Court held that section 3 of the
Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA),
enacted in 1996, is unconstitutional.
Section 3 of DOMA defined ‘‘marriage’’
and ‘‘spouse’’ as excluding same-sex
marriages and same-sex spouses, and
effectively precluded the Federal
government from recognizing same-sex
marriages and spouses.
DATES: The CMS ruling announced in
this document is applicable beginning
February 9, 2015, with respect to
appeals pending on, initiated, or
reopened in accordance with applicable
rules after February 9, 2015, for
entitlement and enrollment
determinations made on or after June
26, 2013. This ruling does not apply to
appeals of entitlement and enrollment
determinations made before June 26,
2013.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patty Helphenstine (410) 786–0622.
In
‘‘Windsor,’’ (570 U.S. 12, 133 S. Ct. 2675
§ 180.518 Pyrimethanil; tolerance for
(2013), the Supreme Court held that
residues.
section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act
(a) * * *
(DOMA), enacted in 1996 (codified at 1
U.S.C. 7), is unconstitutional.
(1) * * *
The CMS Administrator signed Ruling
CMS–4176–R on February 9, 2015. This
Parts per
Commodity
CMS Ruling, as well as other CMS
million
Rulings are available at https://
www.cms.gov/Regulations-and*
*
*
*
*
Guidance/Guidance/Rulings/
Pomegranate ..............................
5.0 index.html. For the readers’
convenience, the text of the CMS Ruling
*
*
*
*
*
4176–R is set forth in the Appendix to
this notice of CMS ruling.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2015–02949 Filed 2–12–15; 8:45 am]
7975
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital
Insurance; and Program No. 93.774,
Medicare—Supplementary Medical
Insurance Program)
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
Ruling No.: CMS–4176–R
Date: February 9, 2015
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services (CMS) Rulings are decisions of
the Administrator of CMS that serve as
precedential final opinions, orders and
statements of policy and interpretation.
They provide clarification and
interpretation of complex provisions of
the law or regulations relating to
Medicare, Medicaid, Utilization and
Quality Control Peer Review, private
health insurance, and related matters.
They are published under the authority
of the Administrator.
CMS Rulings are binding on all CMS
components, Part A and Part B Medicare
Administrative Contractors (MACs),
Qualified Independent Contractors
(QICs), the Provider Reimbursement
Review Board, the Medicare Geographic
Classification Review Board, and on the
Medicare Appeals Council and
Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) who
hear Medicare appeals. Rulings promote
consistency in interpretation of policy
and adjudication of disputes.
This Ruling states the CMS policies
for implementing United States v.
Windsor, 570 U.S. 12, 133 S. Ct. 2675
(2013) (‘‘Windsor’’), in which the
Supreme Court held that section 3 of the
Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA),
enacted in 1996 (codified at 1 U.S.C. 7),
is unconstitutional. Section 3 of DOMA
defined ‘‘marriage’’ and ‘‘spouse’’ as
excluding same-sex marriages and samesex spouses, and effectively precluded
the Federal government from
recognizing same-sex marriages and
spouses.
MEDICARE PROGRAM
Entitlement and Enrollment in
Medicare Hospital Insurance (Part A)
and Medicare Supplementary Medical
Insurance (Part B)
CITATIONS: Sections 216(h), 226,
226A, 1818(c)–(d), 1837(i) and 1839 of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
Sections 416, 426, 426–1, 1395i–2,
1395p and 1395r); 42 CFR 406.5, 406.10,
406.13, 406.24, 406.32(c)–(d), 406.33,
406.34, 407.20, 407.22(a)(5), 407.25(c),
407.27(b), 408.22 and 408.24.
E:\FR\FM\13FER1.SGM
13FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 30 (Friday, February 13, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7971-7975]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02949]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0530; FRL-9922-07]
Pyrimethanil; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of
pyrimethanil in or on pomegranate at 5.0 parts per million (ppm).
Janssen PMP requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective February 13, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 14, 2015, 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-2014-0530, 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: Susan Lewis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main 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
Publishing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0530 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
April 14, 2015. 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-2014-0530, by one of
the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of December 17, 2014 (79 FR 75107) (FRL-
9918-90), EPA issued a document pursuant to
[[Page 7972]]
FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of
a pesticide petition (PP 3F8213) by Janssen PMP, Janssen Pharmaceutica
NV, 1125 Trenton-Harbourton Rd Titusville, NJ 08560-0200. The petition
requested that the 40 CFR 180.518 be amended by establishing a
tolerance for residues of the fungicide pyrimethanil in or on
pomegranate at 5.0 parts per million (ppm). That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by Janssen PMP, 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 FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for pyrimethanil including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with pyrimethanil 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. Pyrimethanil is of low acute lethality by the oral, dermal,
and inhalation routes. It is a slight eye irritant, is not irritating
to the skin, and it is not a dermal sensitizer. A single oral dose of
1,000 milligram/kilogram (mg/kg) produced a number of acute signs of
neurotoxicity, including ataxia, dilated pupils, and decreases in motor
activity, hind limb grip strength, and body temperature. However, there
was no evidence of neurotoxicity with repeated dosing in a subchronic
neurotoxicity study in rats. The major target organs of repeated oral
exposure were the liver, kidney, and the thyroid. These effects were
accompanied by decreased body weight. Reproductive toxicity was not
observed, and developmental effects (e.g., decreased fetal weight,
retarded ossification, extra ribs) were observed only at maternally
toxic doses. Special short-term exposure studies demonstrated increased
liver uridine diphosphate glucuronosyl transferase (UDPGT) activity
leading to decreases in thyroid hormones (T3, T4) and compensatory
increases in thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) in adult rats.
Thyroid adenomas were seen in rats following long-term exposure,
and it was concluded that they were mediated via disruption of the
thyroid/pituitary axis. There were no concerns for mutagenicity. The
EPA has classified pyrimethanil as ``Not Likely To Be Carcinogenic To
Humans At Doses That Do Not Alter Rat Thyroid Hormone Homeostasis.''
This decision was based on the following:
1. There were treatment-related increases in thyroid follicular
cell tumors in male and female Sprague-Dawley rats at doses which were
considered adequate to assess carcinogenicity; however, rats are
substantially more sensitive than humans are to the development of
thyroid follicular cell tumors in response to thyroid hormone
imbalance.
2. There were no treatment-related tumors seen in male or female
CD-1 mice at doses which were considered adequate to assess
carcinogenicity.
3. There is no mutagenicity concern and there is no evidence for
thyroid carcinogenesis mediated through a mutagenic mode of action.
4. The non-neoplastic toxicological evidence (i.e., thyroid growth,
thyroid hormonal changes) indicated that pyrimethanil was inducing a
disruption in the thyroid-pituitary hormonal status. The overall
weight-of-evidence was considered sufficient to indicate that
pyrimethanil induced thyroid follicular tumors through a non-linear,
antithyroid mode of action.
For these reasons, EPA determined that quantification of
carcinogenic risk is not required and that the no observed adverse
effect level (NOAEL) (17 mg/kg/day) established for deriving the
chronic reference dose (cPAD) would be protective of cancer effects.
Due to the non-linear mode of action of pyrimethanil, exposure at the
NOAEL is not expected to alter thyroid hormone homeostasis nor result
in thyroid tumor formation.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by pyrimethanil as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in the final rule
published in the Federal Register of August 1, 2012 (77 FR 45499) (FRL-
9354-7).
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for pyrimethanil used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III. B. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of August 1, 2012 (77 FR 45500) (FRL-
9354-7).
[[Page 7973]]
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to pyrimethanil, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing pyrimethanil tolerances in 40
CFR 180.518. EPA assessed dietary exposures from pyrimethanil in food
as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
Such effects were identified for pyrimethanil. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2003-2008 National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA).
As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed default processing factors
(as necessary), empirical processing factors for orange and apple
juice, tolerance-level residues, and 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for
all commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 2003-2008
NHNES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed default
processing factors (as necessary), empirical processing factors for
orange and apple juice, tolerance-level residues, and 100 PCT for all
commodities.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that pyrimethanil should be classified as ``Not Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans at Doses That Do Not Alter Rat Thyroid Hormone
Homeostasis''. Therefore a separate cancer exposure assessment was not
performed.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for pyrimethanil. Tolerance-level residues and/or
100 PCT were assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for pyrimethanil in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of pyrimethanil. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
pyrimethanil for acute exposures are estimated to be 86.5 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and 4.8 ppb for ground water. For
chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments, they are estimated to be
29.4 ppb for surface water and 4.8 ppb for ground water. Modeled
estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly entered into
the dietary exposure model.
For acute dietary risk assessment, the water concentration value of
86.5 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.
For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration of
value 29.4 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
Pyrimethanil is not registered for any specific use patterns that
would result in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found pyrimethanil to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and pyrimethanil does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
pyrimethanil does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The prenatal and postnatal
toxicology database for pyrimethanil includes rat and rabbit
developmental toxicity studies and a 2-generation reproduction toxicity
study in rats. As discussed in Unit III.A., there was no evidence of
increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility of fetuses or
offspring following exposure to pyrimethanil in these studies.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for pyrimethanil is complete.
ii. Although there is evidence of neurotoxicity in the acute
neurotoxicity study, concern is low since effects were only seen at the
limit dose, effects are well-characterized with clearly established
NOAEL/LOAEL values, and the selected endpoints are protective for the
observed effects. The thyroid has been shown to be one of the target
organs in adult animals for pyrimethanil-induced toxicity thus raising
a potential concern for thyroid toxicity in the young. EPA, however
concluded that there is no concern for thyroid toxicity in the young
based on the following weight of evidence considerations: The effects
seen on the thyroid and the liver database, while treatment-related,
are not severe in nature; and in each of the studies that show an
effect on thyroid hormone levels, as well as in all studies chosen for
PODs selection, there is a wide dose spread (~10-fold difference
between NOELs and LOAELs) which provides a measure of protection for
any potential effects linked to decreased thyroid hormone levels in
offspring.
iii. There is no evidence that pyrimethanil results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or
[[Page 7974]]
in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction study.
iv. The exposure databases are sufficient to determine the nature/
magnitude of the residue in food and dietary analyses are unlikely to
underestimate risk of exposure from pyrimethanil.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to pyrimethanil will occupy 38% of the aPAD for children 1-2 years old,
the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
pyrimethanil from food and water will utilize 78% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for pyrimethanil.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term and intermediate-term aggregate
exposure takes into account short-and intermediate-term residential
exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a
background exposure level). A short- and intermediate-term adverse
effect was identified; however, pyrimethanil is not registered for any
use patterns that would result in short-and/or intermediate-term
residential exposure. Short-and intermediate-term risk is assessed
based on short-and intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no short-and intermediate-term
residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been
assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as
protective as the POD used to assess short-term risk), no further
assessment of short-and intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA
relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating short-and
intermediate-term risk for pyrimethanil.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. The Agency determined
that the thyroid tumors seen in rat studies arise through a non-linear
mode of action and the NOAEL (17 mg/kg/day) established for deriving
the cRfD is not expected to alter thyroid hormone homeostasis nor
result in thyroid tumor formation. Thus, the chronic risk assessment
addresses any cancer risk. Based on the results of chronic risk
assessment, EPA concludes that aggregate exposure to pyrimethanil will
not cause a cancer risk.
5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to pyrimethanil residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC)) is available to enforce the tolerance
expression. The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical
Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft.
Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established a MRL for pyrimethanil in or on
pomegranate.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established for residues of pyrimethanil,
in or on pomegranate at 5.0 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action 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 action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This 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 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 action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as
[[Page 7975]]
described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (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 (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: February 6, 2015.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--AMENDED
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. In Sec. 180.518, alphabetically add the commodity ``Pomegranate''
to the table in paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.518 Pyrimethanil; tolerance for residues.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Pomegranate................................................. 5.0
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-02949 Filed 2-12-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P