Fluxapyroxad; Pesticide Tolerances, 45073-45078 [2015-18544]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 145 / Wednesday, July 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
45073
WEST VIRGINIA—2006 24-HOUR PM2.5 NAAQS—Continued
[Primary and secondary]
Designation
Classification
Designated area a
Date 1
Webster County ...................................................................................
Wetzel County .....................................................................................
Wirt County ..........................................................................................
Wood County .......................................................................................
Wyoming County .................................................................................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
Type
Date 2
Type
Unclassifiable/Attainment.
Unclassifiable/Attainment.
Unclassifiable/Attainment.
Unclassifiable/Attainment.
Unclassifiable/Attainment.
a Includes
Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
date is 30 days after November 13, 2009, unless otherwise noted.
2 This date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted.
1 This
*
*
*
*
*
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. 2015–18532 Filed 7–28–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0638; FRL–9930–73]
I. General Information
Fluxapyroxad; 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
tolerances for residues of fluxapyroxad
in or on cotton, gin byproducts and
cotton, undelinted seed. BASF
Corporation requested these tolerances
under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective July
29, 2015. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
September 28, 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–2012–0638, 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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 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 Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl. To access the OCSPP test
guidelines referenced in this document
electronically, please go to https://
www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ‘‘Test
Methods and Guidelines.’’
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2012–0638 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 28, 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–
2012–0638, 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),
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
45074
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 145 / Wednesday, July 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 4F8270) by BASF
Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.666 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the fungicide fluxapyroxad
(BAS 700 F), 3-(difluoromethyl)-1methyl-N-(3′,4′,5′-trifluoro[1,1′biphenyl]-2-yl)-1H-pyrazole-4carboxamide, its metabolites, and
degradates, in or on cotton, gin
byproducts at 20 parts per million
(ppm); cotton undelinted seed at 0.30
ppm. That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by
BASF Corporation, 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 fluxapyroxad
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with fluxapyroxad follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
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.
Fluxapyroxad is of low acute toxicity
by the oral, dermal and inhalation
routes, is not irritating to the eyes and
skin, and is not a dermal sensitizer. The
primary target organ for fluxapyroxad
exposure via the oral route is the liver
with secondary toxicity in the thyroid
for rats only. Liver toxicity was
observed in rats, mice, and dogs, with
rats as the most sensitive species for all
durations of exposure. In rats, adaptive
effects of hepatocellular hypertrophy
and increased liver weights and changes
in liver enzyme activities were first
observed. As the dose or duration of
exposure to fluxapyroxad increased,
clinical chemistry changes related to
liver function also occurred, followed
by hepatocellular necrosis, neoplastic
changes in the liver, and tumors.
Thyroid effects were observed only in
rats. These effects were secondary to
changes in liver enzyme regulation,
which increased metabolism of thyroid
hormone, resulting in changes in
thyroid hormones, thyroid follicular
hypertrophy and hyperplasia, and
thyroid tumor formation. Tumors were
not observed in species other than rats
or in organs other than the liver and
thyroid.
Fluxapyroxad is classified as ‘‘Not
likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’
based on convincing evidence that
carcinogenic effects are not likely below
a defined dose range. There is no
mutagenicity concern from in vivo or in
vitro assays. The hypothesized mode of
action (i.e., a non-genotoxic) for
treatment related tumors (i.e., the liver
and thyroid) was supported by a full
panel of in vitro and in vivo studies that
showed no evidence of genotoxicity,
together with mechanistic studies in the
liver and thyroid of rats that satisfied
stringent criteria for establishing
tumorgenic modes of action. The studies
clearly identified the sequence of key
events, dose-response concordance and
temporal relationship to the tumor
types. The Agency has determined that
the chronic population adjusted dose
(PAD) will adequately account for all
chronic effects, including
carcinogenicity that could result from
exposure to fluxapyroxad because the
points of departure (POD) for the
chronic population adjusted dose
(cPAD) is based on the most sensitive
endpoint, liver effects. Effects in the
liver preceded liver tumors and the
effects observed in the thyroid (in rats
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
only) were believed to be secondary to
the liver effects.
No evidence of neurotoxicity was
observed in response to repeated
administration of fluxapyroxad. An
acute neurotoxicity study showed
decreased rearing and motor activity.
This occurred on the day of dosing only
and in the absence of histopathological
effects or alterations in brain weights.
This indicated that any neurotoxic
effects of fluxapyroxad are likely to be
transient and reversible due to
alterations in neuropharmacology and
not from neuronal damage. There were
no neurotoxic effects observed in the
subchronic dietary toxicity study. No
evidence of reproductive toxicity was
observed. Developmental effects
observed in both rats and mice (thyroid
follicular hypertrophy and hyperplasia
in rats and decreased defecation, food
consumption, body weight/body weight
gain, and increased litter loss in rabbits)
occurred at the same doses as those that
caused adverse effects in maternal
animals, indicating no quantitative
susceptibility. Since the maternal
toxicities of thyroid hormone
perturbation in rats and systemic
toxicity in rabbits likely contributed to
the observed developmental effects
there is low concern for qualitative
susceptibility. An immunotoxicity study
in mice showed no evidence of
immunotoxic effects from fluxapyroxad.
Subchronic oral toxicity studies in
rats, developmental toxicity studies in
rabbits, and in vitro and in vivo
genotoxicity studies were performed for
fluxapyroxad metabolites F700F001,
M700F002, and M700F048. Like
fluxapyroxad, no genotoxic effects were
observed for any of these metabolites.
All three metabolites displayed lower
subchronic toxicity via the oral route
than fluxapyroxad, with evidence of
non-specific toxicity (decreased body
weight) observed only for M700F0048 at
the limit dose. Only M700F0048
exhibited developmental toxicity at
doses similar to those that caused
developmental effects in rabbits with
fluxapyroxad treatment. However, these
effects (abortions and resorptions) were
of a different nature than for
fluxapyroxad (paw hyperflexion) and
are considered secondary to maternal
toxicity. The Agency considers these
studies sufficient for hazard
identification and characterization and
concludes that these metabolites do not
have hazards that exceed those of
fluxapyroxad in nature, severity, or
potency.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by fluxapyroxad as well
as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 145 / Wednesday, July 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document,
‘‘Human Health Risk Assessment for
Use of Fluxapyroxad on Numerous
Crops’’ at pp. 52 in docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0638.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
toxicological 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 PAD or a reference dose (RfD)—and a
safe margin of exposure (MOE). For nonthreshold risks, the Agency assumes
45075
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 chemical name used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR FLUXAPYROXAD FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Exposure/scenario
Acute dietary (General population including infants and
children, and females 13–49
years of age).
Chronic dietary (All populations)
Incidental oral short-term (1 to
30 days).
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30
days).
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).
Point of departure
and
uncertainty/safety
factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk
assessment
Study and toxicological effects
NOAEL = 125 mg/
kg/day.
UFA = 10× ...............
UFH = 10× ...............
FQPA SF = 1× .........
NOAEL = 2.1 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10× ...............
UFH = 10× ...............
FQPA SF = 1× .........
NOAEL = 9 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10× ...............
UFH = 10× ...............
FQPA SF = 1× .........
NOAEL= 9 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10× ...............
UFH = 10× ...............
FQPA SF = 1× .........
Acute RfD = 1.25
mg/kg/day.
aPAD = 1.25 mg/kg/
day.
Acute neurotoxicity study in rats
LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day based on decreased motor activity
and decreased rearing.
Chronic RfD = 0.021
mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.021 mg/
kg/day.
Chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study in rats
LOAEL = 11 mg/kg/day based on non-neoplastic changes in
the liver (foci, masses).
LOC for MOE = 100
28-day oral toxicity study in rats
LOAEL = 176 mg/kg/day based on changes in thyroid hormones and thyroid follicular hypertrophy/hyperplasia.
LOC for MOE = 100
28-day oral toxicity study in rats
LOAEL = 176 mg/kg/day based on changes in thyroid hormones and thyroid follicular hypertrophy/hyperplasia.
Classification: Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans at doses sufficient to induce liver and/or thyroid tumors.
Quantification of risk using a non-linear approach (i.e., RfD) will adequately account for all chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity.
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). UFL = use
of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term risk assessment.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to fluxapyroxad, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing fluxapyroxad tolerances in 40
CFR 180.666. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from fluxapyroxad 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
exposure. Such effects were identified
for fluxapyroxad. 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 used
tolerance-level residues adjusted
upward to account for metabolites of
concern not included in the tolerance
expression, 100 percent crop treated
(PCT) assumptions, and dietary
exposure evaluation model (DEEM)
default and empirical processing factors.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA 2003–2008 NHANES/
WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, a
moderately refined chronic dietary
exposure analysis was performed. An
assumption of 100 PCT and DEEM
default and empirical processing factors
were used for the chronic dietary
analysis. Combined average field-trial
residues for parent and highest fieldtrial residues for metabolites of concern
were used for all plant commodities. For
livestock commodities tolerance-level
residues adjusted upward to account for
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
45076
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 145 / Wednesday, July 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
metabolites of concern not included in
the tolerance expression were used.
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 fluxapyroxad. Cancer risk
was assessed using the same exposure
estimates as discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii.,
chronic exposure.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. Section
408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA
to use available data and information on
the anticipated residue levels of
pesticide residues in food and the actual
levels of pesticide residues that have
been measured in food. If EPA relies on
such information, EPA must require
pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1)
that data be provided 5 years after the
tolerance is established, modified, or
left in effect, demonstrating that the
levels in food are not above the levels
anticipated. For the present action, EPA
will issue such data call-ins as are
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E)
and authorized under FFDCA section
408(f)(1). Data will be required to be
submitted no later than 5 years from the
date of issuance of these tolerances.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for fluxapyroxad in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
fluxapyroxad. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Tier 1 Rice Model and
the Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground
Water (PRZM GW), the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)
of fluxapyroxad for acute exposures are
estimated to be 127 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 203 ppb for
ground water. The EDWCs for chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments
are estimated to be 127 ppb for surface
water and 184 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 203 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 184 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
Fluxapyroxad is currently registered for
the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Residential turf.
EPA assessed residential exposure using
the following assumptions: Residential
handler exposures are expected to be
short-term (1 to 30 days) via either the
dermal or inhalation routes of
exposures. Intermediate-term exposures
are not likely because of the intermittent
nature of applications by homeowners.
Since no dermal hazard was identified
for fluxapyroxad, MOEs were calculated
for the inhalation route of exposure
only.
Both adults and children may be
exposed to fluxapyroxad residues from
contact with treated lawns. Adult postapplication exposures were not
quantitatively assessed since no dermal
hazard was identified for fluxapyroxad
and inhalation exposures are typically
negligible in outdoor settings. The
exposure assessment for children
included incidental oral exposure
resulting from transfer of residues from
the hands or objects to the mouth, and
from incidental ingestion of soil. Postapplication hand-to-mouth and objectto-mouth exposures are expected to be
short-term (1 to 30 days) in duration due
to the intermittent nature of
applications in residential
environments. Further information
regarding EPA standard assumptions
and generic inputs for residential
exposures may be found at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/
trac6a05.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found fluxapyroxad to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
fluxapyroxad does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that fluxapyroxad 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
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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.
No evidence of quantitative
susceptibility was observed in a
reproductive and developmental
toxicity study in rats or in
developmental toxicity studies in rats
and rabbits. Developmental toxicity data
in rats showed decreased body weight
and body weight gain in the offspring at
the same dose levels that caused thyroid
follicular hypertrophy/hyperplasia in
parental animals. Effects in rabbits were
limited to paw hyperflexion, a
malformation that is not considered to
result from a single exposure and that
usually reverses as the animal matures.
Developmental effects observed in both
rats and rabbits occurred at the same
doses as those that caused adverse
effects in maternal animals, indicating
no quantitative susceptibility. The
Agency has low concern for
developmental toxicity because the
observed effects were of low severity,
were likely secondary to maternal
toxicity, and demonstrated clear
NOAELs. Further, the NOAELs for these
effects were at dose levels higher than
the points of departure selected for risk
assessment for repeat-exposure
scenarios. Therefore, based on the
available data and the selection of risk
assessment endpoints that are protective
of developmental effects, there are no
residual uncertainties with regard to
pre- and/or postnatal toxicity.
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
fluxapyroxad is complete. Although no
subchronic inhalation data is available,
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 145 / Wednesday, July 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
EPA has waived that data requirement
based on, among other things, its
conclusion that even if an additional
10X safety factor was applied,
inhalation exposure would not raise a
risk of concern.
ii. There is no indication that
fluxapyroxad is a neurotoxic chemical
and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity. Neither the acute nor the
subchronic neurotoxicity studies
indicated specific neurotoxicity
responses to fluxapyroxad. Because
fluxapyroxad can disrupt thyroid
hormone levels, the Agency considered
the potential for fluxapyroxad to cause
developmental neurotoxicity as a result
of thyroid hormone disruption, which is
more sensitive endpoint than the
endpoints used in a developmental
neurotoxicity study. Based on its
evaluation of thyroid hormone data
submitted for fluxapyroxad and the
ontogeny of thyroid hormone
metabolism, the Agency has determined
that adverse thyroid hormone
disruptions in the young are unlikely to
occur at dose levels as low as the points
of departure chosen for risk assessment.
The Agency has low concern for
neurotoxic effects of fluxapyroxad at
any life stage.
iii. Based on the developmental and
reproductive toxicity studies discussed
in Unit III.D.2., there are no residual
uncertainties with regard to prenatal
and/or postnatal toxicity.
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 or field trial
residue data. The dietary risk
assessment is based on reliable data, is
conservative and will not underestimate
dietary exposure to fluxapyroxad. EPA
made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground and surface
water modeling used to assess exposure
to fluxapyroxad in drinking water. EPA
used similarly conservative assumptions
to assess postapplication exposure of
children as well as incidental oral
exposure of toddlers. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by fluxapyroxad.
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-,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
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
fluxapyroxad will occupy 12% of the
aPAD for children 3–5 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 fluxapyroxad
from food and water will utilize 64% of
the cPAD for infants (< 1 year old).
Based on the explanation in Unit
III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of fluxapyroxad 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). Fluxapyroxad 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 fluxapyroxad. 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 320 for
adults and 560 for children. Because
EPA’s level of concern for fluxapyroxad
is a MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs
are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level). An
intermediate-term adverse effect was
identified; however, fluxapyroxad is not
registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on intermediateterm residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure
and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45077
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for
fluxapyroxad.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. As discussed in Unit III.A.,
EPA has classified fluxapyroxad as ‘‘Not
likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’
based on convincing evidence that
carcinogenic effects are not likely below
a defined dose range. The Agency has
determined that the quantification of
risk using the cPAD for fluxapyroxad
will adequately account for all chronic
toxicity, including carcinogenicity that
could result from exposure to
fluxapyroxad. As noted above, chronic
exposure to fluxapyroxad from food and
water will utilize 64% of the cPAD for
infants (< 1year old) the population
group receiving the greatest exposure.
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 fluxapyroxad
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
A Liquid Chromatography-Mass
Spectrometer/Mass Spectrometer (LC/
MS/MS) method is available as an
enforcement method. This method uses
reversed-phase High Pressure Liquid
Chromatography (HPLC) with gradient
elution, and includes 2 ion transitions
to be monitored for the parent
fluxapyroxad.
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,
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
45078
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 145 / Wednesday, July 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
There is a Codex MRL for cotton,
undelinted seed at 0.01 ppm. However,
this MRL is based on seed treatment of
cotton, and not foliar applications
(which is the proposed use for the U.S.
registration and which results in higher
residues). Therefore, there is no ground
for harmonization of U.S. tolerance and
Codex MRL.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of fluxapyroxad [3(difluoromethyl)-1-methyl-N-(3′,4′,5′trifluoro[1,1′-biphenyl]-2-yl)-1Hpyrazole-4-carboxamide], including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on
cotton, gin byproducts at 20 ppm and
cotton undelinted seed at 0.30 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action amends existing
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 tolerances 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).
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: July 22, 2015.
Susan Lewis,
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 § 180.666, revise the entries for
‘‘Cotton, gin byproducts’’ and ‘‘Cotton,
undelinted seed’’ in the table in
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
■
§ 180.666 Fluxapyroxad; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
Parts per million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
*
*
Cotton, gin byproducts .......................................................................................................................................................................
Cotton, undelinted seed .....................................................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
[FR Doc. 2015–18544 Filed 7–28–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
*
20
0.30
*
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 145 (Wednesday, July 29, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45073-45078]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18544]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0638; FRL-9930-73]
Fluxapyroxad; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
fluxapyroxad in or on cotton, gin byproducts and cotton, undelinted
seed. BASF Corporation requested these tolerances under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective July 29, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before September 28, 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-2012-0638, 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. To access the OCSPP
test guidelines referenced in this document electronically, please go
to https://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ``Test Methods and Guidelines.''
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0638 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 28, 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-2012-0638, 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),
[[Page 45074]]
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 4F8270)
by BASF Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.
The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.666 be amended by establishing
tolerances for residues of the fungicide fluxapyroxad (BAS 700 F), 3-
(difluoromethyl)-1-methyl-N-(3',4',5'-trifluoro[1,1'-biphenyl]-2-yl)-
1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide, its metabolites, and degradates, in or on
cotton, gin byproducts at 20 parts per million (ppm); cotton undelinted
seed at 0.30 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by BASF Corporation, 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 fluxapyroxad including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with fluxapyroxad 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.
Fluxapyroxad is of low acute toxicity by the oral, dermal and
inhalation routes, is not irritating to the eyes and skin, and is not a
dermal sensitizer. The primary target organ for fluxapyroxad exposure
via the oral route is the liver with secondary toxicity in the thyroid
for rats only. Liver toxicity was observed in rats, mice, and dogs,
with rats as the most sensitive species for all durations of exposure.
In rats, adaptive effects of hepatocellular hypertrophy and increased
liver weights and changes in liver enzyme activities were first
observed. As the dose or duration of exposure to fluxapyroxad
increased, clinical chemistry changes related to liver function also
occurred, followed by hepatocellular necrosis, neoplastic changes in
the liver, and tumors. Thyroid effects were observed only in rats.
These effects were secondary to changes in liver enzyme regulation,
which increased metabolism of thyroid hormone, resulting in changes in
thyroid hormones, thyroid follicular hypertrophy and hyperplasia, and
thyroid tumor formation. Tumors were not observed in species other than
rats or in organs other than the liver and thyroid.
Fluxapyroxad is classified as ``Not likely to be Carcinogenic to
Humans'' based on convincing evidence that carcinogenic effects are not
likely below a defined dose range. There is no mutagenicity concern
from in vivo or in vitro assays. The hypothesized mode of action (i.e.,
a non-genotoxic) for treatment related tumors (i.e., the liver and
thyroid) was supported by a full panel of in vitro and in vivo studies
that showed no evidence of genotoxicity, together with mechanistic
studies in the liver and thyroid of rats that satisfied stringent
criteria for establishing tumorgenic modes of action. The studies
clearly identified the sequence of key events, dose-response
concordance and temporal relationship to the tumor types. The Agency
has determined that the chronic population adjusted dose (PAD) will
adequately account for all chronic effects, including carcinogenicity
that could result from exposure to fluxapyroxad because the points of
departure (POD) for the chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD) is
based on the most sensitive endpoint, liver effects. Effects in the
liver preceded liver tumors and the effects observed in the thyroid (in
rats only) were believed to be secondary to the liver effects.
No evidence of neurotoxicity was observed in response to repeated
administration of fluxapyroxad. An acute neurotoxicity study showed
decreased rearing and motor activity. This occurred on the day of
dosing only and in the absence of histopathological effects or
alterations in brain weights. This indicated that any neurotoxic
effects of fluxapyroxad are likely to be transient and reversible due
to alterations in neuropharmacology and not from neuronal damage. There
were no neurotoxic effects observed in the subchronic dietary toxicity
study. No evidence of reproductive toxicity was observed. Developmental
effects observed in both rats and mice (thyroid follicular hypertrophy
and hyperplasia in rats and decreased defecation, food consumption,
body weight/body weight gain, and increased litter loss in rabbits)
occurred at the same doses as those that caused adverse effects in
maternal animals, indicating no quantitative susceptibility. Since the
maternal toxicities of thyroid hormone perturbation in rats and
systemic toxicity in rabbits likely contributed to the observed
developmental effects there is low concern for qualitative
susceptibility. An immunotoxicity study in mice showed no evidence of
immunotoxic effects from fluxapyroxad.
Subchronic oral toxicity studies in rats, developmental toxicity
studies in rabbits, and in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity studies were
performed for fluxapyroxad metabolites F700F001, M700F002, and
M700F048. Like fluxapyroxad, no genotoxic effects were observed for any
of these metabolites. All three metabolites displayed lower subchronic
toxicity via the oral route than fluxapyroxad, with evidence of non-
specific toxicity (decreased body weight) observed only for M700F0048
at the limit dose. Only M700F0048 exhibited developmental toxicity at
doses similar to those that caused developmental effects in rabbits
with fluxapyroxad treatment. However, these effects (abortions and
resorptions) were of a different nature than for fluxapyroxad (paw
hyperflexion) and are considered secondary to maternal toxicity. The
Agency considers these studies sufficient for hazard identification and
characterization and concludes that these metabolites do not have
hazards that exceed those of fluxapyroxad in nature, severity, or
potency.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by fluxapyroxad as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level
[[Page 45075]]
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in
document, ``Human Health Risk Assessment for Use of Fluxapyroxad on
Numerous Crops'' at pp. 52 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0638.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological 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 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 chemical name used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Fluxapyroxad for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure
Exposure/scenario and uncertainty/ RfD, PAD, LOC for Study and toxicological effects
safety factors risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (General population NOAEL = 125 mg/kg/ Acute RfD = 1.25 mg/ Acute neurotoxicity study in rats
including infants and children, day. kg/day. LOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day based on
and females 13-49 years of age). UFA = 10x........... aPAD = 1.25 mg/kg/ decreased motor activity and
UFH = 10x........... day. decreased rearing.
FQPA SF = 1x........
Chronic dietary (All populations) NOAEL = 2.1 mg/kg/ Chronic RfD = 0.021 Chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity
day. mg/kg/day. study in rats
UFA = 10x........... cPAD = 0.021 mg/kg/ LOAEL = 11 mg/kg/day based on non-
UFH = 10x........... day. neoplastic changes in the liver
FQPA SF = 1x........ (foci, masses).
Incidental oral short-term (1 to NOAEL = 9 mg/kg/day. LOC for MOE = 100.. 28-day oral toxicity study in rats
30 days). UFA = 10x........... LOAEL = 176 mg/kg/day based on
UFH = 10x........... changes in thyroid hormones and
FQPA SF = 1x........ thyroid follicular hypertrophy/
hyperplasia.
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 NOAEL= 9 mg/kg/day.. LOC for MOE = 100.. 28-day oral toxicity study in rats
days). UFA = 10x........... LOAEL = 176 mg/kg/day based on
UFH = 10x........... changes in thyroid hormones and
FQPA SF = 1x........ thyroid follicular hypertrophy/
hyperplasia.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans at doses sufficient
to induce liver and/or thyroid tumors. Quantification of risk using a non-
linear approach (i.e., RfD) will adequately account for all chronic
toxicity, including carcinogenicity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term
risk assessment.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to fluxapyroxad, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing fluxapyroxad tolerances in 40
CFR 180.666. EPA assessed dietary exposures from fluxapyroxad 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 fluxapyroxad. 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 used tolerance-level residues adjusted upward to account for
metabolites of concern not included in the tolerance expression, 100
percent crop treated (PCT) assumptions, and dietary exposure evaluation
model (DEEM) default and empirical processing factors.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 2003-2008
NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, a moderately refined
chronic dietary exposure analysis was performed. An assumption of 100
PCT and DEEM default and empirical processing factors were used for the
chronic dietary analysis. Combined average field-trial residues for
parent and highest field-trial residues for metabolites of concern were
used for all plant commodities. For livestock commodities tolerance-
level residues adjusted upward to account for
[[Page 45076]]
metabolites of concern not included in the tolerance expression were
used.
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 fluxapyroxad. Cancer risk was assessed using the same
exposure estimates as discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii., chronic exposure.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and
information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in
food and the actual levels of pesticide residues that have been
measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must require
pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after
the tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect,
demonstrating that the levels in food are not above the levels
anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to be submitted no later
than 5 years from the date of issuance of these tolerances.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for fluxapyroxad in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of fluxapyroxad. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Tier 1 Rice Model and the Pesticide Root Zone Model
Ground Water (PRZM GW), the estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) of fluxapyroxad for acute exposures are estimated to be 127
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 203 ppb for ground water.
The EDWCs for chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments are
estimated to be 127 ppb for surface water and 184 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 203 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 184 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). Fluxapyroxad is
currently registered for the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Residential turf. EPA assessed residential
exposure using the following assumptions: Residential handler exposures
are expected to be short-term (1 to 30 days) via either the dermal or
inhalation routes of exposures. Intermediate-term exposures are not
likely because of the intermittent nature of applications by
homeowners. Since no dermal hazard was identified for fluxapyroxad,
MOEs were calculated for the inhalation route of exposure only.
Both adults and children may be exposed to fluxapyroxad residues
from contact with treated lawns. Adult post-application exposures were
not quantitatively assessed since no dermal hazard was identified for
fluxapyroxad and inhalation exposures are typically negligible in
outdoor settings. The exposure assessment for children included
incidental oral exposure resulting from transfer of residues from the
hands or objects to the mouth, and from incidental ingestion of soil.
Post-application hand-to-mouth and object-to-mouth exposures are
expected to be short-term (1 to 30 days) in duration due to the
intermittent nature of applications in residential environments.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found fluxapyroxad to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and fluxapyroxad does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
fluxapyroxad 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. No evidence of quantitative
susceptibility was observed in a reproductive and developmental
toxicity study in rats or in developmental toxicity studies in rats and
rabbits. Developmental toxicity data in rats showed decreased body
weight and body weight gain in the offspring at the same dose levels
that caused thyroid follicular hypertrophy/hyperplasia in parental
animals. Effects in rabbits were limited to paw hyperflexion, a
malformation that is not considered to result from a single exposure
and that usually reverses as the animal matures. Developmental effects
observed in both rats and rabbits occurred at the same doses as those
that caused adverse effects in maternal animals, indicating no
quantitative susceptibility. The Agency has low concern for
developmental toxicity because the observed effects were of low
severity, were likely secondary to maternal toxicity, and demonstrated
clear NOAELs. Further, the NOAELs for these effects were at dose levels
higher than the points of departure selected for risk assessment for
repeat-exposure scenarios. Therefore, based on the available data and
the selection of risk assessment endpoints that are protective of
developmental effects, there are no residual uncertainties with regard
to pre- and/or postnatal toxicity.
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 fluxapyroxad is complete. Although no
subchronic inhalation data is available,
[[Page 45077]]
EPA has waived that data requirement based on, among other things, its
conclusion that even if an additional 10X safety factor was applied,
inhalation exposure would not raise a risk of concern.
ii. There is no indication that fluxapyroxad is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity. Neither the acute nor
the subchronic neurotoxicity studies indicated specific neurotoxicity
responses to fluxapyroxad. Because fluxapyroxad can disrupt thyroid
hormone levels, the Agency considered the potential for fluxapyroxad to
cause developmental neurotoxicity as a result of thyroid hormone
disruption, which is more sensitive endpoint than the endpoints used in
a developmental neurotoxicity study. Based on its evaluation of thyroid
hormone data submitted for fluxapyroxad and the ontogeny of thyroid
hormone metabolism, the Agency has determined that adverse thyroid
hormone disruptions in the young are unlikely to occur at dose levels
as low as the points of departure chosen for risk assessment. The
Agency has low concern for neurotoxic effects of fluxapyroxad at any
life stage.
iii. Based on the developmental and reproductive toxicity studies
discussed in Unit III.D.2., there are no residual uncertainties with
regard to prenatal and/or postnatal toxicity.
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 or field trial residue data.
The dietary risk assessment is based on reliable data, is conservative
and will not underestimate dietary exposure to fluxapyroxad. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water
modeling used to assess exposure to fluxapyroxad in drinking water. EPA
used similarly conservative assumptions to assess postapplication
exposure of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed
by fluxapyroxad.
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 fluxapyroxad will occupy 12% of the aPAD for children 3-5 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
fluxapyroxad from food and water will utilize 64% of the cPAD for
infants (< 1 year old). Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3.,
regarding residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of fluxapyroxad 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). Fluxapyroxad
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 fluxapyroxad. 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 320 for adults and 560 for
children. Because EPA's level of concern for fluxapyroxad is a MOE of
100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
fluxapyroxad is not registered for any use patterns that would result
in intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for
fluxapyroxad.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. As discussed in Unit
III.A., EPA has classified fluxapyroxad as ``Not likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans'' based on convincing evidence that carcinogenic
effects are not likely below a defined dose range. The Agency has
determined that the quantification of risk using the cPAD for
fluxapyroxad will adequately account for all chronic toxicity,
including carcinogenicity that could result from exposure to
fluxapyroxad. As noted above, chronic exposure to fluxapyroxad from
food and water will utilize 64% of the cPAD for infants (< 1year old)
the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
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 fluxapyroxad residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
A Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometer/Mass Spectrometer (LC/MS/
MS) method is available as an enforcement method. This method uses
reversed-phase High Pressure Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) with gradient
elution, and includes 2 ion transitions to be monitored for the parent
fluxapyroxad.
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,
[[Page 45078]]
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for
departing from the Codex level.
There is a Codex MRL for cotton, undelinted seed at 0.01 ppm.
However, this MRL is based on seed treatment of cotton, and not foliar
applications (which is the proposed use for the U.S. registration and
which results in higher residues). Therefore, there is no ground for
harmonization of U.S. tolerance and Codex MRL.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of fluxapyroxad
[3-(difluoromethyl)-1-methyl-N-(3',4',5'-trifluoro[1,1'-biphenyl]-2-
yl)-1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide], including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on cotton, gin byproducts at 20 ppm and cotton
undelinted seed at 0.30 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action amends existing 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 tolerances 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).
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: July 22, 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. 180.666, revise the entries for ``Cotton, gin byproducts''
and ``Cotton, undelinted seed'' in the table in paragraph (a) to read
as follows:
Sec. 180.666 Fluxapyroxad; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Cotton, gin byproducts.................................. 20
Cotton, undelinted seed................................. 0.30
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-18544 Filed 7-28-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P