Benalaxyl-M; Pesticide Tolerances, 45443-45448 [2015-18741]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 146 / Thursday, July 30, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
proposed by the petitioner including
canola, refined oil at 0.03 ppm; flax,
seed, oil at 0.03 ppm; grape, raisin at 5.0
ppm; mustard, seed, oil at 0.03 ppm and
sesame, oil at 0.03 ppm.
Lhorne on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of isofetamid, in or on
almond at 0.01 ppm; almond, hulls at
0.01 ppm; canola, refined oil at 0.03
ppm; flax, seed, oil at 0.03 ppm; grape,
raisin at 5.0 ppm; lettuce, head at 5.0
ppm; lettuce, leaf at 7.0 ppm; berry, low
growing, subgroup 13–07G at 4.0 ppm;
mustard, seed, oil at 0.03 ppm; rapeseed
subgroup 20A at 0.015 ppm; sesame, oil
at 0.03 ppm; and fruit, small vine
climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit,
subgroup 13–07F at 3.0 ppm.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:32 Jul 29, 2015
Jkt 235001
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 21, 2015.
Jack Housenger,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Add § 180.681 to subpart C to read
as follows:
■
§ 180.681
residues.
Isofetamid; tolerances for
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of the fungicide
isofetamid, including its metabolites
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45443
and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by
measuring only isofetamid, N-[1,1dimethyl-2-[2-methyl-4-(1methylethoxy)phenyl]-2-oxoethyl]-3methyl-2-thiophenecarboxamide, in or
on the following commodities:
Commodity
Parts per
million
Almond ..................................
Almond, hulls ........................
Berry, low growing, subgroup
13–07G .............................
Canola, refined oil ................
Flax, seed, oil .......................
Fruit, small vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F ....................
Grape, raisin .........................
Lettuce, head ........................
Lettuce, leaf ..........................
Mustard, seed, oil .................
Rapeseed subgroup 20A ......
Sesame, oil ...........................
0.01
0.01
4.0
0.03
0.03
3.0
5.0
5.0
7.0
0.03
0.015
0.03
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues.
[Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2015–18738 Filed 7–29–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0714; FRL–9927–63]
Benalaxyl-M; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of benalaxyl-M
in or on grape and tomato. Since there
are currently no U.S. registrations of
benalaxyl-M for use on grape and
tomato, this tolerance will allow the
import of grape and tomato containing
residues of benalaxyl-M. Technology
Sciences Group, on behalf of Isagro
S.p.A, requested these tolerances under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective July
30, 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:
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
45444
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 146 / Thursday, July 30, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0714, 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.
ADDRESSES:
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).
Lhorne on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://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.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:32 Jul 29, 2015
Jkt 235001
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–2013–0714 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–
2013–0714, 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 February
21, 2014 (79 FR 9870) (FRL–9904–98),
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 3E8162) by
Technology Sciences Group on behalf of
Isagro S.p.A., 1150 18th Street NW.,
Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20036. The
petition requested that 40 CFR part 180
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
be amended by establishing import
tolerances for residues of the fungicide
benalaxyl-M in or on grape at 1.1 parts
per million (ppm); grape juice at 1.1
ppm; grape wine at 1.1 ppm; grape
raisin at 2.2 ppm; tomato at 0.25 ppm;
and tomato processed at 0.25 ppm. That
document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Technology
Sciences Group on behalf of Isagro
S.p.A., the registrant, which is available
in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. No tolerancerelated comments were submitted.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing tolerances as follows: 3.0
ppm for grapes and 0.20 ppm for
tomato. The reasons 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
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 benalaxyl-M
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with benalaxyl-M 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
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 146 / Thursday, July 30, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
Benalaxyl-M has no significant acute
toxicity via oral, dermal or inhalation
route of exposure. It is not a skin irritant
and does not cause skin sensitization.
The liver and thyroid are the primary
target organs for benalaxyl-M. In rats,
increased liver weights, clinical
chemistry changes indicative of liver
toxicity, hepatocellular hypertrophy,
and thyroid follicular cell hypertrophy
were seen following subchronic and
chronic exposure. In mice, increased
liver weight and microscopic lesions in
the liver (hepatocellular hypertrophy,
necrosis, eosinophilic foci) were
observed following subchronic and
chronic exposure. Additionally, chronic
exposure in rats and mice led to
increases in the incidence of liver (rat,
mouse) and thyroid (rat) tumors. In
dogs, increased liver weight, changes in
clinical chemistry indicative of liver
toxicity, and hepatocellular hypertrophy
were observed following subchronic
exposure via the diet, whereas clinical
chemistry changes indicative of liver
toxicity, fat vacuolation in the liver, and
thyroid follicular cell hypertrophy were
observed following chronic exposure via
capsules.
No evidence of increased quantitative
or qualitative susceptibility was seen in
the benalaxyl-M hazard database
following in utero exposure with rats or
rabbits in the prenatal developmental
studies or in young rats in the 2–
generation reproduction study. No
evidence of maternal toxicity or
developmental effects was observed in
the developmental toxicity studies in
rabbits or rats. There is no reproductive
concern. No neurotoxic effects were
observed in the acute and subchronic
neurotoxicity studies in rats, and no
immunotoxic effects were observed in
the immunotoxicity study in rats.
Benalaxyl-M was classified as ‘‘Likely
to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’. This
determination was based on the
treatment-related liver tumors observed
in male mice, liver tumors observed in
male and female rats; and thyroid
follicular cell tumors observed in female
rats. No treatment-related tumors were
observed in female mice. A linear lowdose extrapolation model (Q*1) was
used to estimate cancer risk, based on
the male mouse liver tumor rates. There
is no mutagenicity concern from the in
vivo or in vitro genetic toxicity assays.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by benalaxyl-M 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://
‘‘Benalaxyl-M. Human-Health Risk
Assessment for Tolerances in/on
Imported Grape and Tomato’’ on pages
10 through 20 in docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0714.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
45445
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which no adverse effects are
observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for benalaxyl-M used for
human risk assessment is shown in the
Table of this unit.
Table—Summary of Toxicological Doses
and Endpoints for Benalaxyl-M for Use
in Human Health Risk Assessment
TABLE 4.5.4.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR BENALAXYL-M FOR USE IN DIETARY HUMAN
HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENTS
Point of departure
Acute Dietary (General Population, including Infants,
Children, and females
13+).
Chronic Dietary ...................
(All Popyulations) ................
Lhorne on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Exposure/Scenario
Uncertainty/
FQPA safety factors
RfD, PAD, Level
of concern for
risk assessment
UFA= 10x ...........
UFH= 10x ...........
FQPA UFDB =
10x.
Chronic RfD = ....
cPAD = 0.02 mg/
kg/day.
No appropriate
acute endpoint
was identified.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:32 Jul 29, 2015
NOAEL= 20 mg/
kg/day.
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Study and toxicological effects
Chronic
Toxicity/Carcinogenicity
Study—rat
(49040634)
LOAEL = 135 mg/kg/day based on based on an increase in g-glutamyl transferase (GGT) in males,
slight increases liver weight in both sexes, increased incidence of hepatocellular hypertrophy in
both sexes, increased incidence of thyroid follicular
cell hypertrophy in both sexes, increased incidence
of thyroid cell hyperplasia in females, increased incidence of thyroid follicular ectasia in females, and
an increased incidence of ovarian stromal cell
hyperplasia in females.
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
45446
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 146 / Thursday, July 30, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 4.5.4.—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR BENALAXYL-M FOR USE IN DIETARY HUMAN
HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENTS—Continued
Exposure/Scenario
Cancer (oral) .......................
Uncertainty/
FQPA safety factors
Point of departure
RfD, PAD, Level
of concern for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
Classification:
‘‘Likely to be
Carcinogenic to
Humans’’.
Based on male
mouse liver tumors, Q1*=
5.90 × 10 3
(mg/kg/
day) 1.
Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is derived from observed dose-response data and used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally relevant human exposures. NOAEL = no observed adverse effect
level. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH =
potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). UFDB = to account for the absence of a comparative thyroid study. FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (c = chronic). RfD = reference dose.
Lhorne on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to benalaxyl-M, EPA assessed
dietary exposures from benalaxyl-M in
food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. No such effects
were identified in the toxicological
studies for benalaxyl-M; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA 2003–2008 CSFII. As to
residue levels in food, EPA used
tolerance-level residues and 100% crop
treated.
iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether
quantitative cancer exposure and risk
assessments are appropriate for a fooduse pesticide based on the weight of the
evidence from cancer studies and other
relevant data. If quantitative cancer risk
assessment is appropriate, cancer risk
may be quantified using a linear or
nonlinear approach. If sufficient
information on the carcinogenic mode
of action is available, a threshold or
nonlinear approach is used and a cancer
RfD is calculated based on an earlier
noncancer key event. If carcinogenic
mode of action data are not available, or
if the mode of action data determines a
mutagenic mode of action, a default
linear cancer slope factor approach is
utilized. Based on the data summarized
in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that
benalaxyl-M should be classified as
‘‘Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’
and a linear approach has been used to
quantify cancer risk. Cancer risk was
quantified using the same estimates as
discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii., chronic
exposure.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:32 Jul 29, 2015
Jkt 235001
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did
not use anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for benalaxyl-M. Tolerance level
residues and/or 100% CT were assumed
for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. An assessment of residues in
drinking water is not required for this
assessment because there is no drinking
water exposure in the U.S. associated
with the establishment of an import
tolerance.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets). BenalaxylM is not registered for any specific use
patterns that would result in residential
exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found benalaxyl-M to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
benalaxyl-M does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that benalaxyl-M does not have
a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
FQPA Safety Factor (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 increased quantitative or
qualitative susceptibility was seen
following in utero exposure to
benalaxyl-M with rats or rabbits in the
prenatal developmental toxicity studies
or in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study. The 2-generation
reproduction study resulted in no
effects on reproductive function or
fertility. The offspring effects occurred
at the same dose that caused parental
effects. No evidence of developmental
delay or developmental toxicity was
observed in developmental toxicity
studies in rabbits or in rats.
The rabbit was tested at the limit dose
(1000 mg/kg/day), and no maternal or
developmental toxicity was observed.
No significant developmental or
maternal toxicity occurred at the highest
dose level tested in the rat study, but the
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 146 / Thursday, July 30, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Lhorne on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
limit dose was not tested. It is not
necessary to require the submission of
an additional rat study since a study at
higher dose levels would not result in
a lower NOAEL and the point of
departure is already 10-fold lower than
the NOAEL in the rat study.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were retained at 10×. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for benalaxylM is complete for purposes of assessing
the exposures from the use of benalaxylM on imported grapes and tomatoes.
However, there remains some
uncertainty regarding the potential for
benalaxyl-M effects on thyroid. Thyroid
toxicity was seen following subchronic
and chronic exposures to adult rats.
There are, however, no data regarding
the potential effects of benalaxyl-M on
thyroid homeostasis in the young
animals. This lack of characterization
creates uncertainty with regards to
potential life stage sensitivities due to
exposure to benalaxyl-M. For future
uses with higher exposure potential, the
Agency will require a comparative
thyroid assay in rats to assess the
potential impact of benalaxyl-M
exposure on thyroid function in the
young given the pivotal role of thyroid
hormones in brain development.
ii. There is no indication that
benalaxyl-M 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
benalaxyl-M 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.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account acute
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:32 Jul 29, 2015
Jkt 235001
exposure estimates from dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, benalaxyl-M is not
expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to benalaxyl-M
from food will utilize 1.4% of the cPAD
for the general U.S. population and all
population sub-groups. The most highly
exposed population subgroup was
children 1–2 years old with an
estimated risk of 7.1% cPAD.
3. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. The cancer dietary
assessment made use of the same input
assumptions as the chronic analysis.
Benalaxyl-M has been classified as
‘‘Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’.
A linear low-dose extrapolation model
(Q1*) was used to estimate cancer risk,
with a Q1* = 5.90 × 10¥3 (mg/kg/
day) ¥1. The cancer risk estimate to the
U.S. population is 1.7 × 10¥6. EPA
generally considers cancer risks in the
range of 10¥6 or less to be negligible.
The precision which can be assumed for
cancer risk estimates is best described
by rounding to the nearest integral order
of magnitude on the log scale; for
example, risks falling between 3 × 10¥7
and 3 × 10¥6 are expressed as risks in
the range of 10¥6. Considering the
precision with which cancer hazard can
be estimated, the conservativeness of
low-dose linear extrapolation, and the
rounding procedure described above in
this unit, cancer risk should generally
not be assumed to exceed the
benchmark level of concern of the range
of 10¥6 until the calculated risk exceeds
approximately 3 × 10¥6. This is
particularly the case where some
conservatism is maintained in the
exposure assessment.
4. Determination of safety. There are
no existing or proposed US registrations
of benalaxyl-M and the only route of
exposure is via dietary ingestion from
imported grape and tomato
commodities. Therefore, aggregate
exposure and risk estimates are
equivalent to the dietary exposures and
risk estimates. 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 benalaxyl-M residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(RA.09.01, a high-performance liquid
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45447
chromatography method with tandem
mass spectrometry detection (HPLC/
MS/MS) is available to enforce the
tolerance expression.
The method may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;
telephone number: (410) 305–2905;
email address: residuemethods@
epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
The Codex has established MRLs for
benalaxyl-M at 0.3 and 0.2 ppm in or on
grape and tomato, respectively. As a
result, the EPA recommendations will
result in harmonization of the U.S.
tolerance with the Codex MRL for
tomato, but not for grape since
benalaxyl-M residues from the grape
trials in Argentina were significantly
higher than the Codex MRL.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
The requested tolerance levels differ
from those being established by EPA.
The petitioner used the NAFTA
calculator to propose tolerance levels
while EPA used OECD MRL calculation
procedures. Additionally, for
determination of the grape and tomato
tolerance levels, the petitioner included
the results from all trials. In contrast,
EPA included only those data that
matched the critical Good Agricultural
Practice (cGAP). The tolerance for grape,
raisin was not recommended because it
is covered by the grape tolerance. No
separate tolerances are needed for grape
juice, grape wine, or processed tomato
products as processing studies showed
that residues of benalaxyl-M do not
concentrate in these processed
commodities.
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
45448
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 146 / Thursday, July 30, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of benalaxyl-M, in or on
grape and tomato at 3.0 and 0.20 ppm,
respectively.
Lhorne on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:32 Jul 29, 2015
Jkt 235001
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).
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
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 24, 2015.
Marty Monell,
Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Add § 180.684 to subpart C to read
as follows:
■
§ 180.684 Benalaxyl-M; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of the fungicide
benalaxyl-M, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by
measuring only benalaxyl [methyl N(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-(phenylacetyl)DL-alaninate] in or on the commodity.
Commodity
Parts per million
Grape 1 ................................
Tomato 1 .............................
3.0
0.20
1 There is no U.S. registration for use on
this commodity as of July 30, 2015.
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues.
[Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2015–18741 Filed 7–29–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 146 (Thursday, July 30, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45443-45448]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18741]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0714; FRL-9927-63]
Benalaxyl-M; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
benalaxyl-M in or on grape and tomato. Since there are currently no
U.S. registrations of benalaxyl-M for use on grape and tomato, this
tolerance will allow the import of grape and tomato containing residues
of benalaxyl-M. Technology Sciences Group, on behalf of Isagro S.p.A,
requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective July 30, 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).
[[Page 45444]]
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0714, 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-2013-0714 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-2013-0714, 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 February 21, 2014 (79 FR 9870) (FRL-
9904-98), 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
3E8162) by Technology Sciences Group on behalf of Isagro S.p.A., 1150
18th Street NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20036. The petition
requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing import
tolerances for residues of the fungicide benalaxyl-M in or on grape at
1.1 parts per million (ppm); grape juice at 1.1 ppm; grape wine at 1.1
ppm; grape raisin at 2.2 ppm; tomato at 0.25 ppm; and tomato processed
at 0.25 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Technology Sciences Group on behalf of Isagro S.p.A., the
registrant, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. No tolerance-related comments were submitted.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing tolerances as follows: 3.0 ppm for grapes and 0.20 ppm for
tomato. The reasons 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 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 benalaxyl-M including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with benalaxyl-M 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
[[Page 45445]]
concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including infants and children.
Benalaxyl-M has no significant acute toxicity via oral, dermal or
inhalation route of exposure. It is not a skin irritant and does not
cause skin sensitization.
The liver and thyroid are the primary target organs for benalaxyl-
M. In rats, increased liver weights, clinical chemistry changes
indicative of liver toxicity, hepatocellular hypertrophy, and thyroid
follicular cell hypertrophy were seen following subchronic and chronic
exposure. In mice, increased liver weight and microscopic lesions in
the liver (hepatocellular hypertrophy, necrosis, eosinophilic foci)
were observed following subchronic and chronic exposure. Additionally,
chronic exposure in rats and mice led to increases in the incidence of
liver (rat, mouse) and thyroid (rat) tumors. In dogs, increased liver
weight, changes in clinical chemistry indicative of liver toxicity, and
hepatocellular hypertrophy were observed following subchronic exposure
via the diet, whereas clinical chemistry changes indicative of liver
toxicity, fat vacuolation in the liver, and thyroid follicular cell
hypertrophy were observed following chronic exposure via capsules.
No evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility
was seen in the benalaxyl-M hazard database following in utero exposure
with rats or rabbits in the prenatal developmental studies or in young
rats in the 2-generation reproduction study. No evidence of maternal
toxicity or developmental effects was observed in the developmental
toxicity studies in rabbits or rats. There is no reproductive concern.
No neurotoxic effects were observed in the acute and subchronic
neurotoxicity studies in rats, and no immunotoxic effects were observed
in the immunotoxicity study in rats.
Benalaxyl-M was classified as ``Likely to be Carcinogenic to
Humans''. This determination was based on the treatment-related liver
tumors observed in male mice, liver tumors observed in male and female
rats; and thyroid follicular cell tumors observed in female rats. No
treatment-related tumors were observed in female mice. A linear low-
dose extrapolation model (Q*1) was used to estimate cancer
risk, based on the male mouse liver tumor rates. There is no
mutagenicity concern from the in vivo or in vitro genetic toxicity
assays.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by benalaxyl-M 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 document ``Benalaxyl-M. Human-Health Risk
Assessment for Tolerances in/on Imported Grape and Tomato'' on pages 10
through 20 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0714.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for benalaxyl-M used for
human risk assessment is shown in the Table of this unit.
Table--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Benalaxyl-M for
Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
Table 4.5.4.--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Benalaxyl-M for Use in Dietary Human Health Risk
Assessments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uncertainty/ RfD, PAD, Level
Exposure/Scenario Point of FQPA safety of concern for Study and toxicological
departure factors risk assessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute Dietary (General No appropriate
Population, including acute endpoint
Infants, Children, and was identified.
females 13+).
Chronic Dietary.............. NOAEL= 20 mg/kg/ UFA= 10x....... Chronic RfD =.. Chronic Toxicity/
(All Popyulations)........... day. UFH= 10x....... cPAD = 0.02 mg/ Carcinogenicity Study--rat
FQPA UFDB = 10x kg/day. (49040634)
LOAEL = 135 mg/kg/day based on
based on an increase in
[gamma]-glutamyl transferase
(GGT) in males, slight
increases liver weight in
both sexes, increased
incidence of hepatocellular
hypertrophy in both sexes,
increased incidence of
thyroid follicular cell
hypertrophy in both sexes,
increased incidence of
thyroid cell hyperplasia in
females, increased incidence
of thyroid follicular ectasia
in females, and an increased
incidence of ovarian stromal
cell hyperplasia in females.
[[Page 45446]]
Cancer (oral)................ Classification:
``Likely to be
Carcinogenic
to Humans''.
Based on male
mouse liver
tumors, Q1*=
5.90 x 10\-3\
(mg/kg/day)\-
1\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is derived from observed dose-response data
and used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally
relevant human exposures. NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect
level. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential
variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). UFDB = to account for the
absence of a comparative thyroid study. FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (c =
chronic). RfD = reference dose.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to benalaxyl-M, EPA assessed dietary exposures from benalaxyl-
M in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. No such effects were identified in the
toxicological studies for benalaxyl-M; therefore, a quantitative acute
dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA 2003-2008
CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA used tolerance-level residues
and 100% crop treated.
iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether quantitative cancer exposure
and risk assessments are appropriate for a food-use pesticide based on
the weight of the evidence from cancer studies and other relevant data.
If quantitative cancer risk assessment is appropriate, cancer risk may
be quantified using a linear or nonlinear approach. If sufficient
information on the carcinogenic mode of action is available, a
threshold or nonlinear approach is used and a cancer RfD is calculated
based on an earlier noncancer key event. If carcinogenic mode of action
data are not available, or if the mode of action data determines a
mutagenic mode of action, a default linear cancer slope factor approach
is utilized. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that benalaxyl-M should be classified as ``Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans'' and a linear approach has been used to
quantify cancer risk. Cancer risk was quantified using the same
estimates as discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii., chronic exposure.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for benalaxyl-M. Tolerance level residues and/or
100% CT were assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. An assessment of residues
in drinking water is not required for this assessment because there is
no drinking water exposure in the U.S. associated with the
establishment of an import tolerance.
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). Benalaxyl-M is not
registered for any specific use patterns that would result in
residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found benalaxyl-M to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and benalaxyl-M does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
benalaxyl-M 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 FQPA Safety
Factor (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 increased
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility was seen following in utero
exposure to benalaxyl-M with rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental toxicity studies or in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study. The 2-generation reproduction study resulted in no
effects on reproductive function or fertility. The offspring effects
occurred at the same dose that caused parental effects. No evidence of
developmental delay or developmental toxicity was observed in
developmental toxicity studies in rabbits or in rats.
The rabbit was tested at the limit dose (1000 mg/kg/day), and no
maternal or developmental toxicity was observed. No significant
developmental or maternal toxicity occurred at the highest dose level
tested in the rat study, but the
[[Page 45447]]
limit dose was not tested. It is not necessary to require the
submission of an additional rat study since a study at higher dose
levels would not result in a lower NOAEL and the point of departure is
already 10-fold lower than the NOAEL in the rat study.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were retained at 10x. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for benalaxyl-M is complete for purposes
of assessing the exposures from the use of benalaxyl-M on imported
grapes and tomatoes. However, there remains some uncertainty regarding
the potential for benalaxyl-M effects on thyroid. Thyroid toxicity was
seen following subchronic and chronic exposures to adult rats. There
are, however, no data regarding the potential effects of benalaxyl-M on
thyroid homeostasis in the young animals. This lack of characterization
creates uncertainty with regards to potential life stage sensitivities
due to exposure to benalaxyl-M. For future uses with higher exposure
potential, the Agency will require a comparative thyroid assay in rats
to assess the potential impact of benalaxyl-M exposure on thyroid
function in the young given the pivotal role of thyroid hormones in
brain development.
ii. There is no indication that benalaxyl-M 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 benalaxyl-M 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.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
benalaxyl-M is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
benalaxyl-M from food will utilize 1.4% of the cPAD for the general
U.S. population and all population sub-groups. The most highly exposed
population subgroup was children 1-2 years old with an estimated risk
of 7.1% cPAD.
3. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. The cancer dietary
assessment made use of the same input assumptions as the chronic
analysis. Benalaxyl-M has been classified as ``Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans''. A linear low-dose extrapolation model
(Q1*) was used to estimate cancer risk, with a
Q1* = 5.90 x 10-3 (mg/kg/day) -1. The
cancer risk estimate to the U.S. population is 1.7 x 10-6.
EPA generally considers cancer risks in the range of 10-6 or
less to be negligible. The precision which can be assumed for cancer
risk estimates is best described by rounding to the nearest integral
order of magnitude on the log scale; for example, risks falling between
3 x 10-7 and 3 x 10-6 are expressed as risks in
the range of 10-6. Considering the precision with which
cancer hazard can be estimated, the conservativeness of low-dose linear
extrapolation, and the rounding procedure described above in this unit,
cancer risk should generally not be assumed to exceed the benchmark
level of concern of the range of 10-6 until the calculated
risk exceeds approximately 3 x 10-6. This is particularly
the case where some conservatism is maintained in the exposure
assessment.
4. Determination of safety. There are no existing or proposed US
registrations of benalaxyl-M and the only route of exposure is via
dietary ingestion from imported grape and tomato commodities.
Therefore, aggregate exposure and risk estimates are equivalent to the
dietary exposures and risk estimates. 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 benalaxyl-M residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (RA.09.01, a high-performance
liquid chromatography method with tandem mass spectrometry detection
(HPLC/MS/MS) is available to enforce the tolerance expression.
The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has established MRLs for benalaxyl-M at 0.3 and 0.2 ppm
in or on grape and tomato, respectively. As a result, the EPA
recommendations will result in harmonization of the U.S. tolerance with
the Codex MRL for tomato, but not for grape since benalaxyl-M residues
from the grape trials in Argentina were significantly higher than the
Codex MRL.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
The requested tolerance levels differ from those being established
by EPA. The petitioner used the NAFTA calculator to propose tolerance
levels while EPA used OECD MRL calculation procedures. Additionally,
for determination of the grape and tomato tolerance levels, the
petitioner included the results from all trials. In contrast, EPA
included only those data that matched the critical Good Agricultural
Practice (cGAP). The tolerance for grape, raisin was not recommended
because it is covered by the grape tolerance. No separate tolerances
are needed for grape juice, grape wine, or processed tomato products as
processing studies showed that residues of benalaxyl-M do not
concentrate in these processed commodities.
[[Page 45448]]
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of benalaxyl-M,
in or on grape and tomato at 3.0 and 0.20 ppm, respectively.
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).
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 24, 2015.
Marty Monell,
Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. Add Sec. 180.684 to subpart C to read as follows:
Sec. 180.684 Benalaxyl-M; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
fungicide benalaxyl-M, including its metabolites and degradates, in or
on the commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance
levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only benalaxyl
[methyl N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-(phenylacetyl)-DL-alaninate] in or on
the commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grape \1\............................................... 3.0
Tomato \1\.............................................. 0.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There is no U.S. registration for use on this commodity as of July
30, 2015.
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2015-18741 Filed 7-29-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P