Naphthalene Acetates; Pesticide Tolerances, 77255-77260 [2015-31309]
Download as PDF
77255
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 239 / Monday, December 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
EPA APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE TEXAS SIP—Continued
State citation
State
approval/
submittal
date
Title/subject
*
*
*
EPA approval date
*
*
Explanation
*
*
Division 4: Materials Handling, Construction, Roads, Streets, Alleys, and Parking Lots
*
*
Section 111.147 ...........................
*
*
*
Roads, Streets, and Alleys ..........
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
12/14/2015 [Insert FEDERAL REGISTER citation].
1/25/2012
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE TEXAS SIP
Name of SIP provision
*
*
Revision to El Paso PM10 Attainment Demonstration SIP (dust
control contingency measures).
*
El Paso, TX .................................
[FR Doc. 2015–31310 Filed 12–11–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0769; FRL–9937–22]
Naphthalene Acetates; Pesticide
Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes a
tolerance for residues of the
naphthalene acetate group in or on
pomegranate. Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR–4) requested the
tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 14, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 12, 2016, 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:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
State
submittal/
effective
date
Applicable geographic or
nonattainment area
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0769, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 Dec 11, 2015
Jkt 238001
EPA approval date
3/7/2012
*
*
12/14/2015 [Insert FEDERAL REGISTER citation].
*
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
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Comments
*
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2014–0769 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing
E:\FR\FM\14DER1.SGM
14DER1
77256
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 239 / Monday, December 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before February 12, 2016. Addresses for
mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40
CFR 178.25(b).
In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please
submit a copy of the filing (excluding
any Confidential Business Information
(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket.
Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior
notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your
objection or hearing request, identified
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2014–0769, 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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of February
11, 2015 (80 FR 7559) (FRL–9921–94),
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 4E8310) by IR–4,
IR–4 Project Headquarters, 500 College
Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ.
The petition requested that 40 CFR
180.155 be amended by establishing
tolerances for residues of a family of
plant growth regulators, the
naphthalene acetates, in or on
pomegranate at 0.05 parts per million
(ppm). That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by
AMVAC Chemical 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 Dec 11, 2015
Jkt 238001
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 the naphthalene
acetates including exposure resulting
from the tolerances established by this
action. EPA’s assessment of exposures
and risks associated with the
naphthalene acetates follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered their
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.
In this regulatory action, 1naphthaleneacetic acid is a species of
chemical that includes several similar
compounds: Naphthaleneacetamide
(NAA acetamide), naphthaleneacetic
acid, potassium naphthaleneacetate
(NAA potassium salt), ammonium
naphthaleneacetate (ammonium NAA),
sodium naphthaleneacetate (NAA
sodium salt), and ethyl
naphthaleneacetate (NAA ethyl ester).
These chemicals are assessed as a single
group and are collectively referred to as
the naphthalene acetates (NAA).
Hereafter, NAA will be used to refer to
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the entire naphthalene acetate group.
These chemical compounds are
structurally related, metabolized to the
acid form (by both plants and animals),
and are eliminated from the body as
glycine and glucuronic acid conjugates
within 36 to 48 hours after exposure.
EPA has concluded that toxicity testing
on any of these compounds should
serve for all members of this group of
chemicals.
In general, NAA sodium salt was the
most toxic form in sub-chronic and
chronic studies. Repeated exposure in
oral toxicity studies resulted in
decreased body weights and body
weight gains accompanied by decreased
food consumption. The major target
organs of sub-chronic and chronic oral
exposure were the liver, stomach, and
lung. Others symptoms of toxicity from
oral exposure included decreased
hematocrit and hemoglobin, reduced
red blood cell (RBC) count in rats and
dogs, and hypocellularity of the bone
marrow in dogs. In contrast to oral
exposures, NAA ethyl ester was the
most toxic chemical species when
administered dermally, inducing
epidermal hyperplasia and
hyperkeratosis, sebaceous gland
hyperplasia, and dermal inflammation.
The NAA sodium salt required a 10-fold
higher dose to elicit similar dermal
effects and no dermal effects were noted
in the NAA acetamide exposure.
Systemic toxicity was not a
consequence of dermal exposure to any
of the tested naphthalene acetates.
Developmental and offspring toxicity
was linked to NAA sodium salt
exposure but was not a common
observation for the entire naphthalene
acetate group. Developing rats exhibited
decreased fetal weight and minor
skeletal changes and were more
susceptible to NAA sodium salt toxicity
than the maternal rats. Skeletal defects
and variants were observed in rabbit
fetuses after exposure to NAA sodium
salt in the developmental rabbit study;
however these effects only occurred at
doses that also compromised maternal
health. Offspring toxicity from NAA
sodium salt manifested as reduced litter
survival and pup weight throughout
lactation in two generations. These
effects coincided with reduced body
weight in both parental generations
indicating the adults and their young
were equally susceptible to NAA
sodium salt.
Carcinogenicity studies of NAA
acetamide in mice and NAA sodium salt
in rats and mice are considered
adequate for the evaluation of the
oncogenicity of the NAA group. In these
three studies the tested NAA
E:\FR\FM\14DER1.SGM
14DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 239 / Monday, December 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
compounds were not carcinogenic in
mice or rats.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by NAA as well as the noobserved-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL)
and the lowest-observed-adverse-effectlevel (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies
can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document,
‘‘Naphthalene Acetate. Human Health
Risk Assessment for a Proposed New
Use on Pomegranate’’ at pp. 31 in
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–
0769.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which the NOAEL and the
LOAEL are identified. Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
77257
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://
www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/assessinghuman-health-risk-pesticides.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for NAA used for human risk
assessment is shown in Table 1 of this
unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR NAA FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Exposure/scenario
Point of departure
and
uncertainty/safety
factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
An acute RfD for the general population or any population subgroups was not selected because no effect attributable to a single exposure was observed in animal studies.
Chronic dietary (All populations)
NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Chronic RfD = 0.25
mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.25 mg/kg/
day
Adult Oral Short-term (1–30
Days).
NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/
day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC = 100 ...............
Inhalation Short-Term (1–30
days).
NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/
day 2
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 10x 3
LOC = 1000 .............
Cancer .......................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Acute dietary (General population including infants and
children).
Not carcinogenic based on rats and mice bioassays. Not mutagenic.
Co-critical Dog Studies with NAA Na salt: Subchronic Toxicity.
Chronic Toxicity.
Subchronic.1
LOAEL = 150 mg/kg/day based on GI tract lesions and
hypocellularity of the bone marrow.
Subchronic NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day.
Chronic LOAEL = 75 mg/kg/day based on stomach lesions in
75% of the males and slight sinusoidal histiocytosis in the
liver of 50% of the males.
Co-critical Dog Studies with NAA Na salt: Subchronic Toxicity.
Chronic Toxicity.
Subchronic LOAEL = 150 mg/kg/day based on GI tract lesions
and hypocellularity of the bone marrow.
Subchronic NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day.
Chronic LOAEL = 75 mg/kg/day based on stomach lesions in
75% of the males and slight sinusoidal histiocytosis in the
liver of 50% of the males.
Chronic NOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day.
Co-critical Dog Studies with NAA Na salt:
Subchronic Toxicity.
Chronic Toxicity.
Subchronic LOAEL = 150 mg/kg/day based on GI tract lesions
and hypocellularity of the bone marrow.
Subchronic NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day.
Chronic LOAEL = 75 mg/kg/day based on stomach lesions in
75% of the males and slight sinusoidal histiocytosis in the
liver of 50% of the males.
Chronic NOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day.
LOC = level of concern. 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. Mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. 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). FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (c = chronic). RfD = reference dose.
1 The NOAEL/LOAEL used to set endpoints for the co-critical dog studies are in bold.
2 Inhalation absorption is assumed to be equivalent to oral absorption.
3 FQPA SF for inhalation accounts for the lack of an inhalation study.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Dec 11, 2015
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\14DER1.SGM
14DER1
77258
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 239 / Monday, December 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to NAA, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerance as well as all existing NAA
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.155. EPA
assessed dietary exposure to NAA 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. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies
for NAA; therefore, a quantitative acute
dietary exposure assessment is
unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the Dietary Exposure
Evaluation Model software with the
Food Commodity Intake Database
(DEEM–FCID), Version 3.16, which
incorporates 2003–2008 food
consumption data from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s)
National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America, (NHANES/WWEIA). DEEM
default processing factors were used to
modify the tolerance values. As to NAA
residues levels in food, tolerance-level
residues and 100 percent crop treated
(PCT) assumptions were applied for all
affected crops.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that NAA does not pose a
cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a
dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did
not use anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for NAA. Tolerance level residues and
100 PCT were assumed for all food
commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening-level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for NAA in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of NAA.
Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at
https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-scienceand-assessing-pesticide-risks/aboutwater-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
Tier 1 (Rice Model) Estimated
Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWCs)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 Dec 11, 2015
Jkt 238001
in surface and groundwater for NAA
were used in the dietary exposure
assessment. The EDWCs were calculated
using the Tier 1 surface water aquatic
model First Index Reservoir Screening
tool (FIRST) and the Tier I/II
groundwater model Pesticide Root Zone
Model Ground Water (PRZM GW), in
Tier I mode. Accordingly, the EDWCs of
NAA for chronic exposures for noncancer assessments are estimated to be
65.1 parts per billion (ppb) for surface
water and 646 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration value of 646 ppb
was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
NAA is currently registered for root
dip and sprout inhibition applications
to ornamentals, which could result in
residential exposures. There is a
potential for short-term oral and
inhalation exposures to residential
handlers, resulting from loading and
applying NAA. Though there is
potential for dermal exposures for
residential handlers, no dermal
endpoint was selected due to the lack of
systemic toxicity up to the limit dose
(1,000 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/
day)). There are no residential uses for
NAA that result in incidental dermal or
oral exposure to children. The rooting
compounds are applied by holding the
plant and dipping the roots into
solution. Very little exposure is
expected from this use. Sprout
inhibitors are applied by spray or paint
brush/roller after pruning trees, or by
spraying near the base of the tree after
pruning root suckers. There is very little
potential for post-application exposure
to NAA for adults or children based on
the residential use pattern; therefore,
residential post-application exposure is
not expected, nor is intermediate- or
long-term exposure based on the
intermittent nature of applications by
homeowners.
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticidescience-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/
standard-operating-proceduresresidential-pesticide.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 NAA to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and NAA does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has assumed that NAA
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://
www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/culmativeassessment-risk-pesticides.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
Food Quality Protection Act Safety
Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this
provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There is low concern and no residual
uncertainty for pre- and/or postnatal
toxicity resulting from exposure to the
naphthalene acetates. Clear NOAELs
and LOAELs were established for the
developmental and offspring effects and
the points of departure selected for all
exposure scenarios are protective of
these effects.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X for the oral and
dermal routes of exposure but retained
a 10X for the inhalation route of
exposure. That decision is based on the
following findings:
i. The toxicity database for NAA is
complete, except for a subchronic
inhalation toxicity study. EPA is
E:\FR\FM\14DER1.SGM
14DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 239 / Monday, December 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
retaining a 10X FQPA SF for the
inhalation route of exposure however,
as discussed in Unit III.C.3, the EPA
only expects short-term inhalation
exposures to residential handlers,
resulting from loading and applying
NAA. Therefore, there is no concern for
increased susceptibility in infants and
children via the inhalation route. EPA
waived the requirements for the acute
and subchronic neurotoxicity studies.
ii. There is no indication that NAA is
a neurotoxic chemical based on the
available studies in the database, and
EPA determined that there is no need
for acute and subchronic developmental
neurotoxicity studies or additional UFs
to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. The endpoints selected from the
co-critical dog studies are protective of
the effects observed in the rat
developmental, rabbit developmental,
and rat reproduction studies. Therefore,
the potential for increased susceptibility
in infants and children is low.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The chronic dietary food exposure
assessment was performed based on 100
PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA
made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground and surface
water modeling used to assess exposure
to NAA in drinking water. Based on the
discussion in Unit III.C.3., regarding
limited residential use patterns,
exposure to residential handlers is very
low and EPA does not anticipate postapplication exposure to children or
incidental dermal or oral exposures to
toddlers resulting from use of NAA in
residential settings. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by NAA.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 Dec 11, 2015
Jkt 238001
selected. Therefore, NAA 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 NAA from food
and water will utilize 15% of the cPAD
for infants <1 year old the population
group receiving the greatest exposure.
Based on the explanation in Unit
III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of NAA 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). Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
short-term exposures, short-term
aggregate risk was estimated for
combined oral and inhalation exposure
in adults applying naphthalene acetate
products with a paint-airless sprayer.
This is considered the worst case
scenario for the aggregate risk
assessment. Endpoints selected for the
short-term adult oral exposure and
inhalation exposure were based on
common effects and could therefore be
combined in the aggregate assessment.
The EPA calculated an aggregated risk
indices (ARI) to combine inhalation and
oral exposures to adults. This resulted
in an ARI greater than 1. An ARI value
greater than 1 is not of concern to EPA,
therefore, aggregate exposure to
residential handlers is acceptable.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Because no intermediate-term adverse
effect was identified, NAA is not
expected to pose an intermediate-term
risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
NAA is not expected to pose a cancer
risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to NAA
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology,
a high performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC) method using
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
77259
fluorescence detection (Method NAA–
AM–001) and a similar method (Method
NAA–AM–002), is available to enforce
the tolerance expression for NAA in
plant commodities.
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.
There is no established Codex MRL
for NAA use on pomegranate.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established
for residues of NAA in or on
pomegranate at 0.05 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes a tolerance
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this action is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This action does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
E:\FR\FM\14DER1.SGM
14DER1
77260
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 239 / Monday, December 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
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).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 Dec 11, 2015
Jkt 238001
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: December 3, 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 § 180.155, add to the table in
alphabetical order an entry for
‘‘pomegranate’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 180.155 1-Naphthaleneacetic acid;
tolerance for residues.
(a) * * *
Commodity
Parts per
million
*
*
*
*
Pomegranate ..............................
*
0.05
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2015–31309 Filed 12–11–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 12, 2016, 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–2015–0451, 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?
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2015–0451; FRL–9939–28]
Polyamide Ester Polymers; Tolerance
Exemption
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of several
polyamide ester polymers as listed in
this final rule. Spring Trading Co. on
behalf of Croda, Inc. submitted a
petition to EPA under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
requesting an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of the listed chemicals on
food or feed commodities.
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 14, 2015. Objections and
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 40 CFR part 180
through the Government Printing
Office’s e-CFR site at https://
www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
E:\FR\FM\14DER1.SGM
14DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 239 (Monday, December 14, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 77255-77260]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31309]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0769; FRL-9937-22]
Naphthalene Acetates; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of the
naphthalene acetate group in or on pomegranate. Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested the tolerance under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective December 14, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 12, 2016,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0769, is available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lewis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
number: (703) 305-7090; email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0769 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing
[[Page 77256]]
must be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before February 12, 2016. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of
objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0769, 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 11, 2015 (80 FR 7559) (FRL-
9921-94), 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
4E8310) by IR-4, IR-4 Project Headquarters, 500 College Road East,
Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.155
be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of a family of plant
growth regulators, the naphthalene acetates, in or on pomegranate at
0.05 parts per million (ppm). That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by AMVAC Chemical 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 the naphthalene acetates
including exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this
action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with the
naphthalene acetates follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
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.
In this regulatory action, 1-naphthaleneacetic acid is a species of
chemical that includes several similar compounds: Naphthaleneacetamide
(NAA acetamide), naphthaleneacetic acid, potassium naphthaleneacetate
(NAA potassium salt), ammonium naphthaleneacetate (ammonium NAA),
sodium naphthaleneacetate (NAA sodium salt), and ethyl
naphthaleneacetate (NAA ethyl ester). These chemicals are assessed as a
single group and are collectively referred to as the naphthalene
acetates (NAA). Hereafter, NAA will be used to refer to the entire
naphthalene acetate group. These chemical compounds are structurally
related, metabolized to the acid form (by both plants and animals), and
are eliminated from the body as glycine and glucuronic acid conjugates
within 36 to 48 hours after exposure. EPA has concluded that toxicity
testing on any of these compounds should serve for all members of this
group of chemicals.
In general, NAA sodium salt was the most toxic form in sub-chronic
and chronic studies. Repeated exposure in oral toxicity studies
resulted in decreased body weights and body weight gains accompanied by
decreased food consumption. The major target organs of sub-chronic and
chronic oral exposure were the liver, stomach, and lung. Others
symptoms of toxicity from oral exposure included decreased hematocrit
and hemoglobin, reduced red blood cell (RBC) count in rats and dogs,
and hypocellularity of the bone marrow in dogs. In contrast to oral
exposures, NAA ethyl ester was the most toxic chemical species when
administered dermally, inducing epidermal hyperplasia and
hyperkeratosis, sebaceous gland hyperplasia, and dermal inflammation.
The NAA sodium salt required a 10-fold higher dose to elicit similar
dermal effects and no dermal effects were noted in the NAA acetamide
exposure. Systemic toxicity was not a consequence of dermal exposure to
any of the tested naphthalene acetates.
Developmental and offspring toxicity was linked to NAA sodium salt
exposure but was not a common observation for the entire naphthalene
acetate group. Developing rats exhibited decreased fetal weight and
minor skeletal changes and were more susceptible to NAA sodium salt
toxicity than the maternal rats. Skeletal defects and variants were
observed in rabbit fetuses after exposure to NAA sodium salt in the
developmental rabbit study; however these effects only occurred at
doses that also compromised maternal health. Offspring toxicity from
NAA sodium salt manifested as reduced litter survival and pup weight
throughout lactation in two generations. These effects coincided with
reduced body weight in both parental generations indicating the adults
and their young were equally susceptible to NAA sodium salt.
Carcinogenicity studies of NAA acetamide in mice and NAA sodium
salt in rats and mice are considered adequate for the evaluation of the
oncogenicity of the NAA group. In these three studies the tested NAA
[[Page 77257]]
compounds were not carcinogenic in mice or rats.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by NAA 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, ``Naphthalene Acetate. Human Health
Risk Assessment for a Proposed New Use on Pomegranate'' at pp. 31 in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0769.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which the NOAEL and the LOAEL are identified.
Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with the POD to
calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a population-
adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe margin of
exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the
adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for NAA used for human
risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for NAA 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 An acute RfD for the general population or any population subgroups was not
including infants and children). selected because no effect attributable to a single exposure was observed in
animal studies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations) NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day Chronic RfD = 0.25 Co-critical Dog Studies with NAA
UFA = 10x........... mg/kg/day. Na salt: Subchronic Toxicity.
UFH = 10x........... cPAD = 0.25 mg/kg/ Chronic Toxicity.
FQPA SF = 1x........ day. Subchronic.\1\
LOAEL = 150 mg/kg/day based on GI
tract lesions and hypocellularity
of the bone marrow.
Subchronic NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day.
Chronic LOAEL = 75 mg/kg/day based
on stomach lesions in 75% of the
males and slight sinusoidal
histiocytosis in the liver of 50%
of the males.
Adult Oral Short-term (1-30 Days) NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day LOC = 100.......... Co-critical Dog Studies with NAA
UFA = 10x........... Na salt: Subchronic Toxicity.
UFH = 10x........... Chronic Toxicity.
FQPA SF = 1x........ Subchronic LOAEL = 150 mg/kg/day
based on GI tract lesions and
hypocellularity of the bone
marrow.
Subchronic NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day.
Chronic LOAEL = 75 mg/kg/day based
on stomach lesions in 75% of the
males and slight sinusoidal
histiocytosis in the liver of 50%
of the males.
Chronic NOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day.
Inhalation Short-Term (1-30 days) NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day LOC = 1000......... Co-critical Dog Studies with NAA
\2\ Na salt:
UFA = 10x........... Subchronic Toxicity.
UFH = 10x........... Chronic Toxicity.
FQPA SF = 10x \3\... Subchronic LOAEL = 150 mg/kg/day
based on GI tract lesions and
hypocellularity of the bone
marrow.
Subchronic NOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day.
Chronic LOAEL = 75 mg/kg/day based
on stomach lesions in 75% of the
males and slight sinusoidal
histiocytosis in the liver of 50%
of the males.
Chronic NOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer........................... Not carcinogenic based on rats and mice bioassays. Not mutagenic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOC = level of concern. 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. Mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. 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). FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population
adjusted dose (c = chronic). RfD = reference dose.
\1\ The NOAEL/LOAEL used to set endpoints for the co-critical dog studies are in bold.
\2\ Inhalation absorption is assumed to be equivalent to oral absorption.
\3\ FQPA SF for inhalation accounts for the lack of an inhalation study.
[[Page 77258]]
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to NAA, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerance as well as all existing NAA tolerances in 40 CFR 180.155. EPA
assessed dietary exposure to NAA 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. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies for NAA; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with
the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID), Version 3.16, which
incorporates 2003-2008 food consumption data from the U.S. Department
of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). DEEM default processing
factors were used to modify the tolerance values. As to NAA residues
levels in food, tolerance-level residues and 100 percent crop treated
(PCT) assumptions were applied for all affected crops.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that NAA does not pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a
dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for NAA. Tolerance level residues and 100 PCT were
assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening-
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for NAA in drinking water. These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of NAA. Further information regarding EPA drinking
water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at
https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
Tier 1 (Rice Model) Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWCs)
in surface and groundwater for NAA were used in the dietary exposure
assessment. The EDWCs were calculated using the Tier 1 surface water
aquatic model First Index Reservoir Screening tool (FIRST) and the Tier
I/II groundwater model Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM
GW), in Tier I mode. Accordingly, the EDWCs of NAA for chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 65.1 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and 646 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 646 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).
NAA is currently registered for root dip and sprout inhibition
applications to ornamentals, which could result in residential
exposures. There is a potential for short-term oral and inhalation
exposures to residential handlers, resulting from loading and applying
NAA. Though there is potential for dermal exposures for residential
handlers, no dermal endpoint was selected due to the lack of systemic
toxicity up to the limit dose (1,000 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/
day)). There are no residential uses for NAA that result in incidental
dermal or oral exposure to children. The rooting compounds are applied
by holding the plant and dipping the roots into solution. Very little
exposure is expected from this use. Sprout inhibitors are applied by
spray or paint brush/roller after pruning trees, or by spraying near
the base of the tree after pruning root suckers. There is very little
potential for post-application exposure to NAA for adults or children
based on the residential use pattern; therefore, residential post-
application exposure is not expected, nor is intermediate- or long-term
exposure based on the intermittent nature of applications by
homeowners.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.
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 NAA to share a common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and NAA does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that NAA 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://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/culmative-assessment-risk-pesticides.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is low concern and no
residual uncertainty for pre- and/or postnatal toxicity resulting from
exposure to the naphthalene acetates. Clear NOAELs and LOAELs were
established for the developmental and offspring effects and the points
of departure selected for all exposure scenarios are protective of
these effects.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X for the oral and dermal routes of exposure
but retained a 10X for the inhalation route of exposure. That decision
is based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for NAA is complete, except for a
subchronic inhalation toxicity study. EPA is
[[Page 77259]]
retaining a 10X FQPA SF for the inhalation route of exposure however,
as discussed in Unit III.C.3, the EPA only expects short-term
inhalation exposures to residential handlers, resulting from loading
and applying NAA. Therefore, there is no concern for increased
susceptibility in infants and children via the inhalation route. EPA
waived the requirements for the acute and subchronic neurotoxicity
studies.
ii. There is no indication that NAA is a neurotoxic chemical based
on the available studies in the database, and EPA determined that there
is no need for acute and subchronic developmental neurotoxicity studies
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. The endpoints selected from the co-critical dog studies are
protective of the effects observed in the rat developmental, rabbit
developmental, and rat reproduction studies. Therefore, the potential
for increased susceptibility in infants and children is low.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The chronic dietary food exposure assessment was performed
based on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to NAA in drinking water. Based on the discussion in
Unit III.C.3., regarding limited residential use patterns, exposure to
residential handlers is very low and EPA does not anticipate post-
application exposure to children or incidental dermal or oral exposures
to toddlers resulting from use of NAA in residential settings. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by NAA.
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,
NAA 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
NAA from food and water will utilize 15% of the cPAD for infants <1
year old the population group receiving the greatest exposure. Based on
the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use patterns,
chronic residential exposure to residues of NAA 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). Using the
exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-term exposures,
short-term aggregate risk was estimated for combined oral and
inhalation exposure in adults applying naphthalene acetate products
with a paint-airless sprayer. This is considered the worst case
scenario for the aggregate risk assessment. Endpoints selected for the
short-term adult oral exposure and inhalation exposure were based on
common effects and could therefore be combined in the aggregate
assessment.
The EPA calculated an aggregated risk indices (ARI) to combine
inhalation and oral exposures to adults. This resulted in an ARI
greater than 1. An ARI value greater than 1 is not of concern to EPA,
therefore, aggregate exposure to residential handlers is acceptable.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). Because no intermediate-term adverse effect was identified, NAA
is not expected to pose an intermediate-term risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, NAA is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to NAA residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology, a high performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC) method using fluorescence detection (Method NAA-
AM-001) and a similar method (Method NAA-AM-002), is available to
enforce the tolerance expression for NAA in plant commodities.
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.
There is no established Codex MRL for NAA use on pomegranate.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established for residues of NAA in or on
pomegranate at 0.05 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the
[[Page 77260]]
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: December 3, 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. 180.155, add to the table in alphabetical order an entry
for ``pomegranate'' to read as follows:
Sec. 180.155 1-Naphthaleneacetic acid; tolerance for residues.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Pomegranate................................................ 0.05
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-31309 Filed 12-11-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P