S-metolachlor; Pesticide Tolerances, 38981-38986 [2015-16523]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 130 / Wednesday, July 8, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0284; FRL–9927–85]
S-metolachlor; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of S-metolachlor
in or on multiple commodities which
are identified and discussed later in this
document. Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR–4) requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective July
8, 2015. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
September 8, 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).
SUMMARY:
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0284, 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:
ADDRESSES:
I. General Information
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Jul 07, 2015
Jkt 235001
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
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–2014–0284 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 September 8, 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–
2014–0284, 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
38981
• 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
FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 4E8248) by IR–4
500 College Road East, Suite 201 W,
Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to
establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180
for residues of S-metolachlor in or on
the raw agricultural commodity lettuce
at 1.5 parts per million (ppm); vegetable,
cucurbit group 9 at 0.50 ppm; vegetable,
fruiting, group 8–10, except tabasco
pepper at 0.10 ppm; low growing berry
subgroup 13–07G except cranberry at
0.40 ppm; and sunflower subgroup 20B
at 0.50 ppm and the concurrent deletion
of the existing tolerances for okra;
vegetable, fruiting, group 8 except
tabasco pepper; cucumber; melon
subgroup 9A; pumpkin; squash, winter;
and sunflower, seed. That document
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection,
the registrant, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the levels at which some of the
tolerances are being established. The
reason for these changes are explained
in Unit IV.C.
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
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
38982
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 130 / Wednesday, July 8, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
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 S-metolachlor
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with S-metolachlor follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
The existing toxicological database is
primarily comprised of studies
conducted with metolachlor. However,
bridging studies indicate that the
metolachlor toxicology database can be
used to assess toxicity for Smetolachlor. In subchronic (metolachlor
and S-metolachlor) and chronic
(metolachlor) toxicity studies in dogs
and rats decreased body weight and
body weight (bw) gain were the most
commonly observed effects. No systemic
toxicity was observed in rabbits when
metolachlor was administered dermally.
There was no evidence of neurotoxic
effects in the available toxicity studies,
and there is no evidence of
Immunotoxicity in the submitted mouse
Immunotoxicity study.
Prenatal developmental studies in the
rat and rabbit with both metolachlor and
S-metolachlor revealed no evidence of a
qualitative or quantitative susceptibility
in fetal animals. A 2-generation
reproduction study with metolachlor in
rats showed no evidence of parental or
reproductive toxicity. There are no
residual uncertainties with regard to
pre- and/or postnatal toxicity.
Metolachlor has been evaluated for
carcinogenic effects in the mouse and
the rat. Metolachlor did not cause an
increase in tumors of any kind in mice.
In rats, metolachlor caused an increase
in benign liver tumors in rats, but this
increase was seen only at the highest
dose tested and was statistically
significant compared to controls only in
females. There was no evidence of
mutagenic or cytogenetic effects in vivo
or in vitro. Based on this evidence, EPA
has concluded that metolachlor does not
have a common mechanism of
carcinogenicity with acetochlor and
alachlor, compounds that are
structurally similar to metolachlor.
Metolachlor has been classified as a
Group C, possible human carcinogen,
based on liver tumors in rats at the
highest dose tested (HDT).
Taking into account the qualitatively
weak evidence on carcinogenic effects
and the fact that the increase in benign
tumors in female rats occurs at a dose
1,500 times the chronic reference dose
(cRfD), EPA has concluded that the cRfD
is protective of any potential cancer
effect.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by S-metolachlor as well
as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in the document
‘‘S-metolachlor—Risk Assessment for
Establishment of Tolerances for New
Uses on Lettuce, Low Growing Berry
Subgroup 13–07G, except Cranberry;
Vegetable, Cucurbit, Group 9; Sunflower
subgroup 20B; Vegetable, Fruiting,
Group 8–10; except Tabasco Pepper and
Okra’’ on pp. 40 in docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0284.
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 the NOAEL and the
LOAEL are identified. Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for S-metolachlor used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR S-METOLACHLOR FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety
factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
Acute dietary (General population including infants and children).
NOAEL = 300 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x.
Acute RfD = 3.0 mg/
kg/day.
aPAD = 3.0 mg/kg/day
Chronic dietary (All populations) ......................
NOAEL= 9.7 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x.
Chronic RfD = 0.097
mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.097 mg/kg/
day.
Developmental
Toxicity
Study—Rat
(metolachlor).
LOAEL = 1,000 mg/kg/day based increased
incidence of death, clinical signs (clonic
and/or tonic convulsions, excessive salivation, urine-stained abdominal fur and/or excessive lacrimation), and decreased body
weight gain.
One
Year
Chronic
Toxicity—Dog
(metolachlor).
LOAEL = 33 mg/kg/day based decreased
body weight gain in females.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Exposure/scenario
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Jul 07, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 130 / Wednesday, July 8, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
38983
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR S-METOLACHLOR FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT—Continued
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety
factors
Exposure/scenario
Incidental oral short-term (1 to 30 days) ..........
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 days) .................
Cancer (all routes) ............................................
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
NOAEL= 50 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x.
LOC for MOE = 100 ...
Inhalation (or oral)
study NOAEL= 50
mg/kg/day (inhalation absorption rate
= 100%).
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 10x UFDB.
LOC for MOE = 1,000
Developmental Toxicity Study—Rat (Smetolachlor).
LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day based on increased
incidence of clinical signs, decreased body
weight/body weight gain, food consumption
and food efficiency seen in maternal animals.
Developmental Toxicity Study—Rat (Smetolachlor).
.....................................
.....................................
LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day based on increased
incidence of clinical signs, decreased body
weight/body weight gain, food consumption
and food efficiency seen at the LOAEL in
maternal animals.
Metolachlor has been classified as a Group C carcinogen with risk quantitated using a non-linear RfD approach.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. Mg/kg/day =
milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c =
chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to S-metolachlor, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing S-metolachlor tolerances in 40
CFR 180.368. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from S-metolachlor 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 Smetolachlor. In estimating acute dietary
exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the United States
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA)
National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey/What We Eat in
America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA assumed
tolerance level residues and 100 percent
crop treated (PCT).
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA’s NHANES/WWEIA. As
to residue levels in food, EPA assumed
tolerance level residues and 100 PCT.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that a nonlinear RfD
approach is appropriate for assessing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Jul 07, 2015
Jkt 235001
cancer risk to S-metolachlor. Therefore,
a separate quantitative cancer exposure
assessment is unnecessary since the
chronic dietary risk estimate will be
protective of potential cancer risk.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue or PCT information
in the dietary assessment for Smetolachlor. Tolerance level residues
and 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 S-metolachlor in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of Smetolachlor. 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.
The Agency assessed parent
metolachlor, and the metabolites CGA–
51202 (metolachlor-OA), CGA–40172,
and CGA–50720 together in the drinking
water assessment using a total toxic
residues (TTR) approach where halflives were recalculated to collectively
account for the parent and the combined
residues of concern.
Based on the Surface Water
Concentration Calculator (SWCC), the
Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground
Water (PRZM GW), and the Screening
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI–
GROW), the estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) of Smetolachlor and its metabolites for
acute exposures are estimated to be 371
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water
and 1,060 ppb for ground water, and for
chronic exposures are estimated to be
43.70 ppb for surface water and 14.3
ppb in 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 1,060 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 43.70 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, termiticide, and flea
and tick control on pets).
S-metolachlor is currently registered
for the following uses that could result
in residential exposures: On commercial
(sod farm) and residential warm-season
turf grasses and other non-crop land
including golf courses, sports fields, and
ornamental gardens. EPA assessed
residential exposure using the following
assumptions: For residential handlers,
short-term inhalation exposure is
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
38984
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 130 / Wednesday, July 8, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
expected. The following scenarios were
evaluated:
• Mixing/loading/applying gardens/
trees with manually-pressurized hand
wand, hose-end sprayer, backpack, and
sprinkler can equipment.
• Mixing/loading/applying lawns/turf
with manually-pressurized hand wand,
hose-end sprayer, backpack, and
sprinkler can equipment.
For residential post-application, there
is the potential for short-term incidental
oral exposure for individuals exposed as
a result of being in an environment that
has been previously treated with Smetolachlor. The quantitative exposure/
risk assessment for residential postapplication exposures is based on the
following scenario:
• Hand-to-mouth incidental oral
exposure of children 1–2 years old
playing on turf treated with Smetolachlor.
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
science/residential-exposure-sop.html.
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 S-metolachlor to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and Smetolachlor does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that S-metolachlor 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 (10×) 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Jul 07, 2015
Jkt 235001
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 10×, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There was no evidence of increased
quantitative or qualitative fetal
susceptibility in the prenatal
developmental studies in rats and
rabbits or in the reproductive toxicity
study in rats, with either metolachlor or
S-metolachlor. In general, significant
developmental toxicity was not seen in
rats or rabbits with either compound.
The only effects observed in fetal
animals were in the rat prenatal
developmental study and included
slightly decreased number of
implantations per dam, decreased
number of live fetuses/dam, increased
number of resorptions/dam and
significant decrease in mean fetal bw.
These effects occurred at maternally
toxic doses (1,000 milligram/kilogram/
day (mg/kg/day)).
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 1× for all scenarios
except inhalation. For inhalation
scenarios a 10× database uncertainty
factor (UF) still applies. This decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicology database for
metolachlor and S-metolachlor is
complete, with the exception of a
required subchronic inhalation study for
metolachlor. As noted above, a 10× data
base UF will be applied only for
assessing risk for inhalation exposure
scenarios.
ii. There is no indication that Smetolachlor is a neurotoxic chemical
and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that Smetolachlor results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100 PCT and
tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to Smetolachlor in drinking water. EPA
used similarly conservative assumptions
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
to assess post-application incidental
oral exposure of children 1<2 years old.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by S-metolachlor.
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 Smetolachlor will occupy 6.1% of the
aPAD for all infants (less than 1 year
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 S-metolachlor
from food and water will utilize 6.8% of
the cPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in
Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of S-metolachlor is not
expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
S-metolachlor is currently registered
for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency
has determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with short-term residential
exposures to S-metolachlor. Potential
short-term residential risk scenarios
anticipated include adult inhalation
handler exposure to turf via backpack
sprayer and post-application incidental
oral exposure of children playing on
treated lawns.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures result in aggregate
MOEs of 10,400 for adults and 1,100 for
children 1–2 years old. Because EPA’s
levels of concern for S-metolachlor is a
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 130 / Wednesday, July 8, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
MOE of 1,000 or below for inhalation
scenarios (adults) and 100 or below for
incidental oral scenarios (children 1–2
years old), these MOEs are not of
concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect
was identified; however, S-metolachlor
is not registered for any use patterns
that would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Because there is
no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure
has already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for Smetolachlor.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. As discussed in Unit III.A,
the chronic dietary risk assessment is
protective of any potential cancer
effects. Based on the results of that
assessment, EPA concludes that Smetolachlor 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 Smetolachlor residues.
IV. Other Considerations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate methodology is available for
enforcing the established and
recommended tolerances. PAM Vol. II,
Pesticide Regulation Section 180.368,
lists a gas chromatography with
nitrogen-phosphorus detector (GC/NPD)
method (Method I) for determining
residues in/on plant commodities and a
gas chromatography with mass selective
detector (GC/MSD) method (Method II)
for determining residues in livestock
commodities. These methods determine
residues of metolachlor and its
metabolites as either CGA–37913 or
CGA–49751 following acid hydrolysis.
Adequate data are also available on the
recovery of metolachlor through FDA’s
Multiresidue Method Testing Protocols
which indicate that metolachlor is
completely recovered through Method
302.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:08 Jul 07, 2015
Jkt 235001
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 S-metolachlor.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
The tolerance being established for
the sunflower subgroup 20B is 1.0 ppm,
not 0.50 ppm as proposed. This is due
to the Agency using the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) Tolerance
Calculation procedures, which
determined that a tolerance of 1.0 ppm
is appropriate based on entry of the 4
field trials for pre-emergence
application.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of S-metolachlor in or on
lettuce at 1.5 ppm; the low growing
berry subgroup 13–07G, except
cranberry at 0.40 ppm; the sunflower
subgroup 20B at 1.0 ppm; the vegetable,
cucurbit group 9 at 0.50 ppm; and the
vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10, except
tabasco pepper at 0.10 ppm.
Additionally, due to the establishment
of the tolerances listed above, the
existing tolerances for vegetable,
fruiting, group 8, except tabasco pepper;
cucumber; melon subgroup 9A; okra;
pumpkin; squash, winter; and
sunflower, seed are removed as they are
unnecessary.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes tolerances
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
38985
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
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).
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
38986
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 130 / Wednesday, July 8, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
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).
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: June 26, 2015.
Susan Lewis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.368:
a. Remove the entries ‘‘Cucumber,’’
‘‘Melon subgroup 9A,’’ ‘‘Okra,’’
‘‘Pumpkin,’’ ‘‘Squash, winter,’’
‘‘Sunflower, seed,’’ and ‘‘Vegetable,
fruiting, group 8, except tabasco
pepper,’’ in paragraph (a)(2).
■ b. Add alphabetically the following
commodities to the table in paragraph
(a)(2).
The amendments read as follows:
■
■
§ 180.368 Metolachlor; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
Parts per
million
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
Vegetable, cucurbit group 9
*
*
*
*
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8–
10, except tabasco pepper
*
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
*
18:08 Jul 07, 2015
*
1.5
0.40
*
1.0
*
Jkt 235001
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 300
RIN 0648–BE71
International Fisheries; Pacific Tuna
Fisheries; 2015 and 2016 Commercial
Fishing Restrictions for Pacific Bluefin
Tuna in the Eastern Pacific Ocean
The National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) is issuing
regulations under the Tuna Conventions
Act to implement Resolution C–14–06
of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna
Commission (IATTC or the
Commission) by establishing limits on
U.S. commercial catch of Pacific bluefin
tuna from waters of the IATTC
Convention Area for 2015 and 2016.
This action is necessary for the United
States to satisfy its obligations as a
member of the IATTC.
DATES: The final rule is effective July 9,
2015.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Regulatory
Impact Review (RIR), Environmental
Assessment, and other supporting
documents are available via the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov, docket NOAA–
NMFS–2014–0151, or contact with the
Regional Administrator, William W.
Stelle, Jr., NMFS West Coast Region,
7600 Sand Point Way NE., Bldg 1,
Seattle, WA 98115–0070, or
RegionalAdministrator.WCRHMS@
noaa.gov.
SUMMARY:
■
*
*
*
Sunflower subgroup 20B ......
*
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
PART 180—[AMENDED]
*
*
AGENCY:
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
*
*
*
Lettuce ..................................
Low growing berry subgroup
13–07G, except cranberry
*
[Docket No. 141222999–5561–02]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Commodity
*
[FR Doc. 2015–16523 Filed 7–7–15; 8:45 am]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Celia Barroso, NMFS, Celia.Barroso@
noaa.gov, 562–432–1850.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 9, 2015, NMFS published
a proposed rule in the Federal Register
(80 FR 12375) to revise regulations at 50
*
CFR part 300, subpart C, to implement
Resolution C–14–06, ‘‘Measures for the
0.10
Conservation and Management of
Bluefin Tuna in the Eastern Pacific
*
Ocean, 2015–2016.’’ This resolution was
*
0.50
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
adopted by the IATTC at its 88th
meeting in October 2014. The public
comment period was open until April 8,
2015, and NMFS accepted public
comment at a hearing held at the NMFS
West Coast Region Long Beach office on
March 26, 2015. Additionally, NMFS
solicited public comment on the
proposed trip limits, which are a new
management tool in U.S. West Coast
management of fisheries for Pacific
bluefin tuna. The proposed trip limits
were based on a recommendation from
the Pacific Fishery Management Council
(Council) at its November 2014 meeting.
The final rule is implemented under
the authority of the Tuna Conventions
Act (16 U.S.C. 951 et seq.), which
directs the Secretary of Commerce, after
approval by the Secretary of State, to
promulgate regulations as may be
necessary to implement resolutions
adopted by the IATTC. This authority
has been delegated to NMFS.
The proposed rule contains additional
background information, including
information on the IATTC, the
international obligations of the United
States as an IATTC member, and the
need for regulations. Additional
information on changes since the
proposed rule is included below.
New Regulations
This final rule establishes catch limits
for U.S. commercial vessels that catch
Pacific bluefin tuna in the Convention
Area (defined as the waters of the
eastern Pacific Ocean (EPO)) for 2015
and 2016. Since 1998, conservation
resolutions adopted by the IATTC have
further defined the Convention Area as
the area bounded by the coast of the
Americas, the 50° N. and 50° S.
parallels, and the 150° W. meridian. In
2015, the catch limit for the entire U.S.
fleet is 425 metric tons (mt) with an
initial trip limit 1 of 25 mt per vessel.
When NMFS anticipates that the total
catch for the fleet has reached 375 mt,
NMFS will impose a 2-mt trip limit for
each vessel that will be in effect until
the total catch for 2015 reaches 425 mt.
For calendar year 2016, NMFS will
announce the catch limit in a Federal
Register notice; NMFS will calculate the
2016 catch limit to ensure compliance
with Resolution C–14–06 (i.e., not to
exceed 425 mt in either year and if catch
exceeds 300 mt in 2015, then catch will
be limited to 200 mt in 2016). The 2016
catch limit will be calculated as the
remainder from the 2015 catch limit
(i.e., how much of 425 mt was not
1 This rule defines ‘‘trip limit’’ as the total
allowable amount of a species by weight of fish that
may be retained on board, transshipped, or landed
during a single fishing trip.
E:\FR\FM\08JYR1.SGM
08JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 130 (Wednesday, July 8, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38981-38986]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16523]
[[Page 38981]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0284; FRL-9927-85]
S-metolachlor; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of S-
metolachlor in or on multiple commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. Interregional Research Project Number
4 (IR-4) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective July 8, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before September 8, 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-2014-0284, 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
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0284 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
September 8, 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-2014-0284, 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 FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
4E8248) by IR-4 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ
08540, requests to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for
residues of S-metolachlor in or on the raw agricultural commodity
lettuce at 1.5 parts per million (ppm); vegetable, cucurbit group 9 at
0.50 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10, except tabasco pepper at
0.10 ppm; low growing berry subgroup 13-07G except cranberry at 0.40
ppm; and sunflower subgroup 20B at 0.50 ppm and the concurrent deletion
of the existing tolerances for okra; vegetable, fruiting, group 8
except tabasco pepper; cucumber; melon subgroup 9A; pumpkin; squash,
winter; and sunflower, seed. That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the levels at which some of the tolerances are being
established. The reason for these changes are explained in Unit IV.C.
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
[[Page 38982]]
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 S-metolachlor including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with S-metolachlor
follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
The existing toxicological database is primarily comprised of
studies conducted with metolachlor. However, bridging studies indicate
that the metolachlor toxicology database can be used to assess toxicity
for S-metolachlor. In subchronic (metolachlor and S-metolachlor) and
chronic (metolachlor) toxicity studies in dogs and rats decreased body
weight and body weight (bw) gain were the most commonly observed
effects. No systemic toxicity was observed in rabbits when metolachlor
was administered dermally. There was no evidence of neurotoxic effects
in the available toxicity studies, and there is no evidence of
Immunotoxicity in the submitted mouse Immunotoxicity study.
Prenatal developmental studies in the rat and rabbit with both
metolachlor and S-metolachlor revealed no evidence of a qualitative or
quantitative susceptibility in fetal animals. A 2-generation
reproduction study with metolachlor in rats showed no evidence of
parental or reproductive toxicity. There are no residual uncertainties
with regard to pre- and/or postnatal toxicity.
Metolachlor has been evaluated for carcinogenic effects in the
mouse and the rat. Metolachlor did not cause an increase in tumors of
any kind in mice. In rats, metolachlor caused an increase in benign
liver tumors in rats, but this increase was seen only at the highest
dose tested and was statistically significant compared to controls only
in females. There was no evidence of mutagenic or cytogenetic effects
in vivo or in vitro. Based on this evidence, EPA has concluded that
metolachlor does not have a common mechanism of carcinogenicity with
acetochlor and alachlor, compounds that are structurally similar to
metolachlor. Metolachlor has been classified as a Group C, possible
human carcinogen, based on liver tumors in rats at the highest dose
tested (HDT).
Taking into account the qualitatively weak evidence on carcinogenic
effects and the fact that the increase in benign tumors in female rats
occurs at a dose 1,500 times the chronic reference dose (cRfD), EPA has
concluded that the cRfD is protective of any potential cancer effect.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by S-metolachlor as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in the document ``S-metolachlor--Risk Assessment
for Establishment of Tolerances for New Uses on Lettuce, Low Growing
Berry Subgroup 13-07G, except Cranberry; Vegetable, Cucurbit, Group 9;
Sunflower subgroup 20B; Vegetable, Fruiting, Group 8-10; except Tabasco
Pepper and Okra'' on pp. 40 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0284.
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 the NOAEL and the LOAEL are identified.
Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with the POD to
calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a population-
adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe margin of
exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the
adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for S-metolachlor used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for S-metolachlor for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure and
Exposure/scenario uncertainty/safety RfD, PAD, LOC for risk Study and toxicological
factors assessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (General population NOAEL = 300 mg/kg/day. Acute RfD = 3.0 mg/kg/ Developmental Toxicity
including infants and children). day. Study--Rat (metolachlor).
UFA = 10x aPAD = 3.0 mg/kg/day.. LOAEL = 1,000 mg/kg/day
UFH = 10x............. based increased incidence
FQPA SF = 1x.......... of death, clinical signs
(clonic and/or tonic
convulsions, excessive
salivation, urine-stained
abdominal fur and/or
excessive lacrimation),
and decreased body weight
gain.
Chronic dietary (All populations).. NOAEL= 9.7 mg/kg/day.. Chronic RfD = 0.097 mg/ One Year Chronic Toxicity--
kg/day. Dog (metolachlor).
UFA = 10x cPAD = 0.097 mg/kg/day LOAEL = 33 mg/kg/day based
UFH = 10x............. decreased body weight gain
FQPA SF = 1x.......... in females.
[[Page 38983]]
Incidental oral short-term (1 to 30 NOAEL= 50 mg/kg/day... LOC for MOE = 100..... Developmental Toxicity
days). Study--Rat (S-
metolachlor).
UFA = 10x ...................... LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day based
UFH = 10x............. on increased incidence of
FQPA SF = 1x.......... clinical signs, decreased
body weight/body weight
gain, food consumption and
food efficiency seen in
maternal animals.
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 Inhalation (or oral) LOC for MOE = 1,000... Developmental Toxicity
days). study NOAEL= 50 mg/kg/ Study--Rat (S-
day (inhalation metolachlor).
absorption rate =
100%).
UFA = 10x ...................... LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day based
UFH = 10x............. on increased incidence of
FQPA SF = 10x UFDB.... clinical signs, decreased
body weight/body weight
gain, food consumption and
food efficiency seen at
the LOAEL in maternal
animals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (all routes)................ Metolachlor has been classified as a Group C carcinogen with risk
quantitated using a non-linear RfD approach.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level
of concern. Mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-
level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor.
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other
data deficiency. UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population
(intraspecies).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to S-metolachlor, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing S-metolachlor
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.368. EPA assessed dietary exposures from S-
metolachlor 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 S-metolachlor. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the United
States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey/What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance level residues and 100
percent crop treated (PCT).
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA's NHANES/
WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance level
residues and 100 PCT.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that a nonlinear RfD approach is appropriate for assessing
cancer risk to S-metolachlor. Therefore, a separate quantitative cancer
exposure assessment is unnecessary since the chronic dietary risk
estimate will be protective of potential cancer risk.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary assessment for S-
metolachlor. Tolerance level residues and 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 S-metolachlor in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of S-metolachlor. 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.
The Agency assessed parent metolachlor, and the metabolites CGA-
51202 (metolachlor-OA), CGA-40172, and CGA-50720 together in the
drinking water assessment using a total toxic residues (TTR) approach
where half-lives were recalculated to collectively account for the
parent and the combined residues of concern.
Based on the Surface Water Concentration Calculator (SWCC), the
Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM GW), and the Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW), the estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) of S-metolachlor and its metabolites for acute
exposures are estimated to be 371 parts per billion (ppb) for surface
water and 1,060 ppb for ground water, and for chronic exposures are
estimated to be 43.70 ppb for surface water and 14.3 ppb in 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 1,060 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 43.70 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,
termiticide, and flea and tick control on pets).
S-metolachlor is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: On commercial (sod farm) and
residential warm-season turf grasses and other non-crop land including
golf courses, sports fields, and ornamental gardens. EPA assessed
residential exposure using the following assumptions: For residential
handlers, short-term inhalation exposure is
[[Page 38984]]
expected. The following scenarios were evaluated:
Mixing/loading/applying gardens/trees with manually-
pressurized hand wand, hose-end sprayer, backpack, and sprinkler can
equipment.
Mixing/loading/applying lawns/turf with manually-
pressurized hand wand, hose-end sprayer, backpack, and sprinkler can
equipment.
For residential post-application, there is the potential for short-
term incidental oral exposure for individuals exposed as a result of
being in an environment that has been previously treated with S-
metolachlor. The quantitative exposure/risk assessment for residential
post-application exposures is based on the following scenario:
Hand-to-mouth incidental oral exposure of children 1-2
years old playing on turf treated with S-metolachlor.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/science/residential-exposure-sop.html.
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 S-metolachlor to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and S-metolachlor does not appear
to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that S-
metolachlor does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10x) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10x, or uses a different additional
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There was no evidence of
increased quantitative or qualitative fetal susceptibility in the
prenatal developmental studies in rats and rabbits or in the
reproductive toxicity study in rats, with either metolachlor or S-
metolachlor. In general, significant developmental toxicity was not
seen in rats or rabbits with either compound. The only effects observed
in fetal animals were in the rat prenatal developmental study and
included slightly decreased number of implantations per dam, decreased
number of live fetuses/dam, increased number of resorptions/dam and
significant decrease in mean fetal bw. These effects occurred at
maternally toxic doses (1,000 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day)).
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1x for all scenarios except inhalation. For
inhalation scenarios a 10x database uncertainty factor (UF) still
applies. This decision is based on the following findings:
i. The toxicology database for metolachlor and S-metolachlor is
complete, with the exception of a required subchronic inhalation study
for metolachlor. As noted above, a 10x data base UF will be applied
only for assessing risk for inhalation exposure scenarios.
ii. There is no indication that S-metolachlor is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that S-metolachlor results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to S-metolachlor in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to assess post-application
incidental oral exposure of children 1<2 years old. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by S-metolachlor.
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 S-metolachlor will occupy 6.1% of the aPAD for all infants (less
than 1 year 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
S-metolachlor from food and water will utilize 6.8% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
S-metolachlor is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
S-metolachlor is currently registered for uses that could result in
short-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it
is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water
with short-term residential exposures to S-metolachlor. Potential
short-term residential risk scenarios anticipated include adult
inhalation handler exposure to turf via backpack sprayer and post-
application incidental oral exposure of children playing on treated
lawns.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 10,400 for adults
and 1,100 for children 1-2 years old. Because EPA's levels of concern
for S-metolachlor is a
[[Page 38985]]
MOE of 1,000 or below for inhalation scenarios (adults) and 100 or
below for incidental oral scenarios (children 1-2 years old), these
MOEs are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however, S-
metolachlor is not registered for any use patterns that would result in
intermediate-term residential exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to assess intermediate-term
risk), no further assessment of intermediate-term risk is necessary,
and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating
intermediate-term risk for S-metolachlor.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. As discussed in Unit
III.A, the chronic dietary risk assessment is protective of any
potential cancer effects. Based on the results of that assessment, EPA
concludes that S-metolachlor 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 S-metolachlor residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate methodology is available for enforcing the established and
recommended tolerances. PAM Vol. II, Pesticide Regulation Section
180.368, lists a gas chromatography with nitrogen-phosphorus detector
(GC/NPD) method (Method I) for determining residues in/on plant
commodities and a gas chromatography with mass selective detector (GC/
MSD) method (Method II) for determining residues in livestock
commodities. These methods determine residues of metolachlor and its
metabolites as either CGA-37913 or CGA-49751 following acid hydrolysis.
Adequate data are also available on the recovery of metolachlor through
FDA's Multiresidue Method Testing Protocols which indicate that
metolachlor is completely recovered through Method 302.
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 S-metolachlor.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
The tolerance being established for the sunflower subgroup 20B is
1.0 ppm, not 0.50 ppm as proposed. This is due to the Agency using the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Tolerance
Calculation procedures, which determined that a tolerance of 1.0 ppm is
appropriate based on entry of the 4 field trials for pre-emergence
application.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of S-metolachlor
in or on lettuce at 1.5 ppm; the low growing berry subgroup 13-07G,
except cranberry at 0.40 ppm; the sunflower subgroup 20B at 1.0 ppm;
the vegetable, cucurbit group 9 at 0.50 ppm; and the vegetable,
fruiting, group 8-10, except tabasco pepper at 0.10 ppm. Additionally,
due to the establishment of the tolerances listed above, the existing
tolerances for vegetable, fruiting, group 8, except tabasco pepper;
cucumber; melon subgroup 9A; okra; pumpkin; squash, winter; and
sunflower, seed are removed as they are unnecessary.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this 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 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).
[[Page 38986]]
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: June 26, 2015.
Susan Lewis,
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. 180.368:
0
a. Remove the entries ``Cucumber,'' ``Melon subgroup 9A,'' ``Okra,''
``Pumpkin,'' ``Squash, winter,'' ``Sunflower, seed,'' and ``Vegetable,
fruiting, group 8, except tabasco pepper,'' in paragraph (a)(2).
0
b. Add alphabetically the following commodities to the table in
paragraph (a)(2).
The amendments read as follows:
Sec. 180.368 Metolachlor; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Lettuce................................................. 1.5
Low growing berry subgroup 13-07G, except cranberry..... 0.40
* * * * *
Sunflower subgroup 20B.................................. 1.0
* * * * *
Vegetable, cucurbit group 9............................. 0.50
* * * * *
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10, except tabasco pepper.. 0.10
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-16523 Filed 7-7-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P