Pendimethalin; Pesticide Tolerances, 79267-79273 [2015-31655]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 244 / Monday, December 21, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
November 9, 2000), nor will it impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. The EPA will
submit a report containing this action
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. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the
Federal Register. This action is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by February 19, 2016. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section
307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: December 8, 2015.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 40 CFR part 52 is amended as
follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart MM—Oregon
2. Section 52.1991 is amended by
adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:24 Dec 18, 2015
Jkt 238001
§ 52.1991 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) The EPA approves Oregon’s June
28, 2010 submittal as meeting the
requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS.
[FR Doc. 2015–31915 Filed 12–18–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0397; FRL–9937–18]
Pendimethalin; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of pendimethalin
in or on multiple commodities which
are identified and discussed later in this
document. Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR–4) requested the
tolerances associated with pesticide
petition number (PP) 4E8282, and BASF
requested the tolerances associated with
(PP) 4F8261, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 21, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 19, 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–2014–0397, 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,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
79267
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/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–2014–0397 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 February 19, 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
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
79268
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 244 / Monday, December 21, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2014–0397, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on commenting
or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is
available at https://www.epa.gov/
dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of December
17, 2014 (79 FR 75107) (FRL–9918–90),
EPA issued a document pursuant to
FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP) 4E8282 by
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4), 500 College Road East,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.361 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the herbicide pendimethalin,
[N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6dinitrobenzenamine], and its metabolite,
4-[(1-ethylpropyl)amino]-2-methyl-3,5dinitrobenzyl alcohol, in or on
caneberry subgroup 13–07A at 0.10
parts per million (ppm) and bushberry
subgroup 13–07B at 0.10 ppm, and
amending the existing crop group
tolerance for nut, tree, group 14 to nut,
tree, group 14–12. That document
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared on behalf of IR–4 by BASF, the
registrant, which is available in the
docket EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0397 at
https://www.regulations.gov.
In the Federal Register of August 26,
2015 (80 FR 51759) (FRL–9931–74),
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) 4F8261 by BASF
Corp., 26 Davis Drive, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27709. The petition requested
that 40 CFR 180.361 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of
the herbicide pendimethalin, [N-(1ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6dinitrobenzenamine], and its metabolite,
4-[(1-ethylpropyl)amino]-2-methyl-3,5dinitrobenzyl alcohol, in or on milk at
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:24 Dec 18, 2015
Jkt 238001
0.04 parts per million (ppm); cattle, fat
at 0.30 ppm; cattle, liver at 1.5 ppm;
cattle, meat at 0.1 ppm; cattle, meat
byproducts, except liver at 3.0 ppm;
goat, fat at 0.30 ppm; goat, liver at 1.5
ppm; goat, meat at 0.10 ppm; goat, meat
byproducts, except liver at 3.0 ppm;
horse, fat at 0.30 ppm; horse, liver at 1.5
ppm; horse, meat at 0.10 ppm; horse,
meat byproducts, except liver at 3.0
ppm; sheep, fat at 0.30 ppm; sheep, liver
at 1.5 ppm; sheep, meat at 0.10 ppm;
and sheep, meat byproducts, except
liver at 3.0 ppm. This petition
additionally requested that 40 CFR
180.361 be amended by revising the
existing tolerance in or on grass forage,
fodder, and hay crop group 17, forage at
1,000 ppm and grass forage, fodder, and
hay crop group 17, hay at 2,000 ppm.
That document referenced a summary of
the petition prepared on behalf of IR–4
by BASF, the registrant, which is
available in the docket EPA–HQ–OPP–
2014–0397 at https://
www.regulations.gov.
Two comments were received on
these notices of filing. EPA’s response to
these comments is discussed in Unit
IV.C.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has revised
the petitioned-for tolerance in or on
cattle, meat byproduct, meat byproduct
except liver, and liver; goat, meat
byproduct, meat byproduct except liver,
and liver; horse, meat byproduct, meat
byproduct except liver, and liver; and
sheep, meat byproduct, meat byproduct
except liver, and liver. The Agency has
determined that the tolerance
expression for the ruminant
commodities is different than that for
plant commodities. Additionally, the
EPA is removing existing tolerances for
Juneberry; nut, tree, group 14; and
pistachio since they are superseded by
this action. The reason for these changes
are explained in Unit IV.D.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 pendimethalin
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with pendimethalin follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children. The target organ
for pendimethalin is the thyroid.
Thyroid toxicity in chronic and
subchronic rat and mouse studies was
manifested as alterations in thyroid
hormones (decreased total T4, and T3,
increased percent of free T4 and T3),
increased thyroid weight, and
microscopic thyroid lesions (including
increased thyroid follicular cell height,
follicular cell hyperplasia, as well as
follicular cell adenomas). Due to these
effects, the Agency required that a
developmental thyroid assay be
conducted to evaluate the impact of
pendimethalin on thyroid hormones,
structure, and/or thyroid hormone
homeostasis during development. A
developmental thyroid study was
submitted and demonstrated that there
is no potential thyroid toxicity
following pre- and/or post-natal
exposure to pendimethalin.
The points of departure (PODs) used
for the chronic and short-term risk
assessments were based on co-critical
studies of a 92-day thyroid function
study in rats, a 56-day thyroid study in
rats, and a 14-day intra thyroid
metabolism study in rats. An
uncertainty factor (UF) of 30X (3X for
interspecies extrapolation and 10X for
intraspecies variation) is applied for the
chronic and short-term risk assessments.
The interspecies UF which used to
account for animal to human differences
in toxicokinetics and toxicodynamics
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 244 / Monday, December 21, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
was reduced to 3X due to several
important quantitative dynamic
differences between rats and humans
with respect to thyroid function. A UF
of 100X (10X for interspecies
extrapolation and 10X for intraspecies
variation) was used in the acute risk
assessment because the POD was based
on an acute neurotoxicity study, not a
thyroid study.
There is no evidence that
pendimethalin is a developmental,
reproductive, neurotoxic, or
immunotoxic chemical. There is no
evidence of increased qualitative or
quantitative susceptibility in the young.
EPA classified pendimethalin as a
‘‘Group C’’, possible human carcinogen
based on a statistically significant
increased trend and pair-wise
comparison between the high-dose
group and controls for thyroid follicular
cell adenomas in male and female rats.
A non-quantitative approach (i.e., nonlinear, reference dose (RfD) approach)
was used to assess cancer risk since
mode-of-action studies are available to
demonstrate that the thyroid tumors are
due to a thyroid-pituitary imbalance,
and also since pendimethalin was
shown to be non-mutagenic in
mammalian somatic cells and germ
cells. Specific information on the
studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by pendimethalin
as well as the no-observed-adverseeffect-level (NOAEL) and the lowestobserved-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL)
from the toxicity studies can be found
at https://www.regulations.gov in
document, ‘‘Pendimethalin—Human
Health Risk Assessment to Support the
Proposed New Uses on the Caneberry
Subgroup 13–07A, and the Bushberry
Subgroup 13–07B, Amended Use on
Grasses and Establishment of Tolerances
for Pendimethalin in/on Grass Forage,
Fodder, and Hay (Crop Group 17) with
New Ruminant Tolerances; Crop Group
Conversion for Tree Nut Crop Group
14.’’ in pages 14–20 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0397.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:24 Dec 18, 2015
Jkt 238001
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://
www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/assessinghuman-health-risk-pesticides.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for Pendimethalin used for
human risk assessment is discussed in
the final rule published in the Federal
Register of August 29, 2012 (77 FR
52240) (FRL–9360–5).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to pendimethalin, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing pendimethalin tolerances in 40
CFR 180.361. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from pendimethalin in food
as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide,
if a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1-day or single
exposure.
Such effects were identified for
pendimethalin. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA Dietary Exposure
Evaluation Model software with the
Food Commodity Intake Database
(DEEM–FCID) Version 3.16. This
software uses 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). As to
residue levels in food, EPA used
tolerance-level residues, and 100
percent crop treated (PCT) for all
commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the DEEM–FCID, Version 3.16
software with 2003–2008 food
consumption data from the USDA’s
NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels
in food, EPA used tolerance-level
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
79269
residues, and 100 percent crop treated
(PCT) for all commodities.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that a nonlinear RfD
approach is appropriate for assessing
cancer risk to pendimethalin. Cancer
risk was assessed using the same
exposure estimates as discussed in Unit
III.C.1.ii., chronic exposure.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did
not use anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for pendimethalin. Tolerance-level
residues and 100 PCT were assumed for
all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. In drinking water, the residue of
concern is pendimethalin parent only.
The Agency used screening-level water
exposure models in the dietary exposure
analysis and risk assessment for
pendimethalin in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of
pendimethalin. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/
pesticide-science-and-assessingpesticide-risks/about-water-exposuremodels-used-pesticide.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model Ground Water (PRZM GW) and
Surface Water Concentration Calculator
(SWCC) models, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of
pendimethalin for acute exposures are
estimated to be 96.4 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 4.38 × 10¥9
ppb for ground water. For chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments,
they are estimated to be 9.73 ppb for
surface water.
For acute dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration value of 96.4 ppb
was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 9.73 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).
Pendimethalin is currently registered
for the following uses that could result
in residential exposures: Turf, home
gardens, and ornamentals. EPA assessed
residential exposure using the following
assumptions:
• For handlers, it is assumed that
residential use will result in short-term
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
79270
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 244 / Monday, December 21, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
(1 to 30 days) duration dermal and
inhalation exposures.
• Residential post-application
exposure is also assumed to be shortterm (1–30 days) in duration, resulting
from the following exposure scenarios:
Æ Gardening: Adults (dermal) and
children 6 < 11 years old (dermal);
Æ Physical activities on turf: Adults
(dermal) and children 1–2 years old
(dermal and incidental oral);
Æ Mowing turf: Adults (dermal) and
children 11 < 16 years old (dermal); and
Æ Exposure to golf courses during
golfing: Adults (dermal), children 11 <
16 years old (dermal), and children 6 <
11 years old (dermal).
EPA did not combine exposure
resulting from adult handler and postapplication exposure resulting from
treated gardens, lawns, and/or golfing
because of the conservative assumptions
and inputs within each estimated
exposure scenario. The Agency believes
that combining exposures resulting from
handler and post-application activities
would result in an overestimate of adult
exposure. EPA selected the most
conservative adult residential scenario
(adult dermal post-application exposure
from gardening) as the contributing
source of residential exposure to be
combined with the dietary exposure for
the aggregate assessment. The children’s
oral exposure is based on postapplication hand-to-mouth exposures.
To include exposure from object-tomouth and soil ingestion in addition to
hand-to-mouth would overestimate the
potential for oral exposure. However,
there is the potential for co-occurrence
of dermal and oral exposure, since the
toxicological effects from the dermal
and oral routes of exposure are the
same. As a result, the children’s
aggregate assessment combines postapplication dermal and oral exposure
along with dietary exposure from food
and water. Further information
regarding EPA standard assumptions
and generic inputs for residential
exposures may be found at https://
www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/standardoperating-procedures-residentialpesticide.
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 pendimethalin to share a
common mechanism of toxicity with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:24 Dec 18, 2015
Jkt 238001
any other substances, and
pendimethalin does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that pendimethalin 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-scienceand-assessing-pesticide-risks/
cumulative-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
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.
There was no indication of pre- and/or
post-natal qualitative or quantitative
increased susceptibility in the
developmental studies in rats and
rabbits or the 2-generation reproduction
studies in rats. A developmental thyroid
toxicity study demonstrated that there is
no potential thyroid toxicity following
pre- and/or post-natal exposure to
pendimethalin.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for
pendimethalin is complete. Although a
subchronic inhalation study was not
available in the database, EPA
determined that one is not needed at
this time based on a weight-of-evidence
analysis, considering the following: (1)
All relevant hazard and exposure
information, which indicates its low
acute inhalation toxicity; (2) its
physical/chemical properties, which
indicate its low volatility; and (3) the
use of an oral POD that results in a
residential inhalation margin of
exposure (MOE) more than 10X the
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
level of concern (in the case of
pendimethalin MOE = 30 based on
thyroid POD).
ii. There is no indication that
pendimethalin 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
pendimethalin 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. In addition, a
developmental thyroid toxicity study
demonstrated that there is no potential
thyroid toxicity following pre- and/or
post-natal exposure to pendimethalin.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100 PCT and
tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to
pendimethalin in drinking water. EPA
used similarly conservative assumptions
to assess post-application exposure of
children as well as incidental oral
exposure of toddlers. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by pendimethalin.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to
pendimethalin will occupy 2% of the
aPAD for all infants less than 1 year old,
the population group receiving the
greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to pendimethalin
from food and water will utilize 2.4% of
the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old,
the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the
explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 244 / Monday, December 21, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
residential exposure to residues of
pendimethalin 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).
Pendimethalin is currently registered
for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency
has determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with short-term residential
exposures to pendimethalin.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures result in aggregate
MOEs of 130 for adults and 92 for
children 1 to 2 years old, the two
population subgroups receiving the
greatest combined dietary and nondietary exposure. Because EPA’s level of
concern for pendimethalin is a MOE of
30 or below, these MOEs are not of
concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect
was identified; however, pendimethalin
is not registered for any use patterns
that would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on intermediateterm residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure
and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for
pendimethalin.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. As discussed in Unit III.A.,
EPA has determined that an RfD
approach based on the chronic point of
departure is appropriate for evaluating
cancer risk. As there are not chronic
aggregate risks of concern, there are no
cancer aggregate risk concerns.
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
pendimethalin residues.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:24 Dec 18, 2015
Jkt 238001
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology,
gas chromatography with electron
capture detection (GC/ECD), 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.
There are currently no established
Codex MRLs for the residues of
pendimethalin.
C. Response to Comments
Two comments were received to the
Notices of Filing for PP 4E8282 and PP
4F8261. One commenter stated:
‘‘Pesticide/Herbicide contents must be
made available to the public due to
allergies. Labeling foods that have been
exposed to Pesticides/Herbicides
protects the public from potentially
ingesting a known allergen. This safe
practice allows health care professionals
to determine the cause of a life
threatening severe reaction to avoid
these products in the future. I am a
nurse hence my concern.’’ The second
commenter stated that no residue
should be allowed for pendimethalin
and that they do not support
manufacture or use of this product. The
Agency understands the commenters’
concerns and recognizes that some
individuals believe that pesticides
should be banned on agricultural crops.
However, the existing legal framework
provided by Section 408 of the Federal
Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
79271
states that tolerances may be set when
persons seeking such tolerances or
exemptions have demonstrated that the
pesticide meets the safety standard
imposed by that statute. These
comments appear to be directed at the
underlying statute and not EPA’s
implementation of it; the citizens have
made no contention that EPA has acted
in violation of the statutory framework.
EPA has found that there is a reasonable
certainty of no harm to humans after
considering the toxicological studies
and the exposure levels of humans to
pendimethalin.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-for
Tolerances
Based on review of the data
supporting the petitions, EPA has
revised the petitioned-for tolerance in or
on ‘‘meat byproduct’’ (at 3.0 ppm) based
on anticipated residues in kidney which
contained the highest residue amongst
all ruminant tissues and will therefore
cover anticipated residues in liver and
fat. BASF, proposed setting a tolerance
on ‘‘meat byproduct except liver’’, also
at 3.0 ppm based on anticipated
residues in kidney with a separate lower
tolerance on liver at 1.5 ppm. However,
the anticipated residues in liver versus
kidney, on which the tolerance for meat
byproduct is based on, are not
significantly different given the limited
number of data for those tissues and that
both are greater than LOQ and within 1
ppm of each other. Therefore, a single
tolerance on ‘‘meat byproduct’’ without
a separate tolerance on liver is adequate.
Additionally, the current tolerance
expression for pendimethalin for plant
commodities includes the combined
residues of pendimethalin and its 3,5dinitrobenzyl alcohol metabolite (CL
202,347). EPA has determined, based on
the review of the ruminant feeding
study, that the residues of concern for
setting tolerances and assessing risks in
ruminants is the parent compound,
pendimethalin, and its metabolite, 1-(1ethylpropyl)-5, 6-dimethyl-7-nitro-1Hbenzimidazole (also known as
metabolite 6).
Finally, the Agency is removing
Juneberry at 0.1 ppm as it is superseded
by fruit, bushberry, subgroup 13–07B; as
well as nut, tree, group 14 and pistachio
at 0.1 ppm to account for an updated
crop group conversion.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for plant residues by measuring only the
sum of pendimethalin, [N-(1ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6dinitrobenzenamine], and its metabolite,
4-[(1-ethylpropyl)amino]-2-methyl-3,5dinitrobenzyl alcohol calculated as the
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
79272
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 244 / Monday, December 21, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
stoichiometric equivalent of
pendimethalin, in or on bushberry
subgroup 13–07B at 0.10 ppm;
caneberry subgroup 13–07A at 0.10
ppm; grass forage, fodder, and hay crop
group 17, forage at 1,000 ppm; grass
forage, fodder, and hay crop group 17,
hay at 2,000 ppm; and nut, tree group
14–12 at 0.1 ppm. Tolerances are
established for livestock commodities is
by measuring only the sum of
pendimethalin, [N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4dimethyl-2,6-dinitrobenzenamine], and
its metabolite, 1-[(1-ethylpropyl)-5,6dimethyl-7-nitro-1H-benzimidazole
(metabolite 6), calculated as the
stoichiometric equivalent of
pendimethalin in or on cattle, fat at 0.30
ppm; cattle, meat at 0.10 ppm; cattle,
meat byproduct 3.0 ppm; goat, fat at
0.30 ppm; goat, meat at 0.10 ppm; goat,
meat byproduct at 3.0 ppm; horse, fat at
0.30 ppm; horse, meat at 0.10 ppm;
horse, byproduct at 3.0 ppm; milk at
0.04 ppm; sheep, fat at 0.30 ppm; sheep,
meat at 0.10 ppm; and sheep, meat
byproduct at 3.0 ppm. Additionally, the
existing tolerances for Juneberry; nut,
tree, group 14; and pistachio are
removed.
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 tolerances in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:24 Dec 18, 2015
Jkt 238001
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 7, 2015.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 § 180.361:
a. Redesignate paragraph (a) as (a)(1).
b. In the newly redesignated
paragraph (a)(1):
■ i. Remove the entries in the table for
‘‘Grass forage, fodder, and hay crop
group 17, straw’’; ‘‘Juneberry’’; ‘‘Nut,
tree group 14’’; and ‘‘Pistachio’’.
■ ii. Revise the entries in the table for
‘‘Grass, forage, fodder, and hay crop
group 17, forage’’ and ‘‘Grass, forage,
fodder, and hay crop group 17, hay’’.
■ iii. Add alphabetically the entries
‘‘Bushberry subgroup 13–07B’’ and
‘‘Caneberry subgroup 13–07A’’ to the
table.
■ c. Add paragraph (a)(2).
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
■
■
■
§ 180.361 Pendimethalin; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. (1) * * *
Parts
per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Bushberry subgroup 13–07B ..........
Caneberry subgroup 13–07A .........
*
0.10
0.10
*
Grass,
crop
Grass,
crop
*
*
*
*
forage, fodder, and hay
group 17, forage .................
forage, fodder, and hay
group 17, hay ......................
1,000
*
*
*
*
Nut, tree, group 14–12 ...................
*
0.10
*
*
*
*
2,000
*
(2) Tolerances are established for
residues of the herbicide pendimethalin,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on commodities listed
in the following table. Compliance with
the tolerance levels is to be determined
by measuring only the sum of
pendimethalin (N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4dimethyl-2,6-dinitrobenzenamine)) and
its metabolite, 1-(1-ethylpropyl)-5, 6dimethyl-7-nitro-1H-benzimidazole
(metabolite 6), calculated as the
stoichiometric equivalent of
pendimethalin, in or on the commodity.
Commodity
Cattle, fat ........................................
Cattle, meat ....................................
Cattle, meat byproduct ...................
Goats, fat ........................................
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
Parts
per
million
0.30
0.10
3.0
0.30
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 244 / Monday, December 21, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Parts
per
million
Commodity
Goats, meat ....................................
Goats, meat byproduct ...................
Horse, fat ........................................
Horse, meat ....................................
Horse, byproduct ............................
Milk .................................................
Sheep, fat .......................................
Sheep, meat ...................................
Sheep, meat byproduct ..................
*
*
*
*
0.10
3.0
0.30
0.10
3.0
0.04
0.30
0.10
3.0
*
[FR Doc. 2015–31655 Filed 12–18–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 391
[Docket No. FMCSA–2012–0178]
RIN 2126–AB40
Guidance on Medical Examiner’s
Certification Integration Final Rule
Regarding Use of Driver Examination
Forms
This guidance is effective
December 21, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may search background
documents or comments to the docket
for this rule, identified by docket
number FMCSA–2012–0178, by visiting
the:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for reviewing documents
and comments. Regulations.gov is
available electronically 24 hours each
day, 365 days a year; or
• DOT Docket Management Facility
(M–30): U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., West Building, Ground
Floor, Room 12–140, Washington, DC
20590–0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Christine Hydock, Chief, Medical
Programs Division, Office of Policy,
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 or
by telephone (202) 366–4001. If you
have questions on viewing material in
the docket, contract Docket services,
telephone (202) 366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Legal Basis
On April, 23, 2015, FMCSA published
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety
a final rule adopting regulations to
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
facilitate the electronic transmission of
ACTION: Guidance.
MEC information from FMCSA’s
SUMMARY: The FMCSA announces a 120- National Registry to the State driver’s
day grace period during which Medical
license agencies (SDLA) for holders of
Examiners may use either the current or Commercial Driver’s Licenses (CDL) and
the newly revised versions of the
Commercial Learner’s Permits (CLP). (80
Medical Examination Report (MER)
FR 22790). On June 22, 2015, FMCSA
Form and Medical Examiner’s
published a document correcting the
Certificate (MEC). This period is from
effective date for use of new forms
December 22, 2015, until April 20, 2016. prescribed in the final rule to December
This action is being taken to ensure that 22, 2015. (80 FR 35577). See 49 CFR
Medical Examiners have sufficient time 391.43(f)(1) and (2) and 391.43(h)(1) and
to become familiar with the new forms
(2).
and to program electronic medical
The final rule, as corrected, requires
records systems.
certified MEs performing physical
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:24 Dec 18, 2015
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
79273
examinations of CMV drivers to use a
newly developed MER Form, MCSA–
5875, in place of the current MER form,
and for use of the newly developed MEC
Form MCSA–5876 for the current MEC
form, beginning on December 22, 2015.
II. Availability of New Forms
On December 14, FMCSA posted the
fillable pdf versions of the new driver
examination forms. The Agency had
planned to make the forms available
prior to this date but experienced
technical difficulties. As a result,
FMCSA has received numerous requests
from the public asking to have the
effective date for use of the MER Form,
MCSA–5875, and the MEC, MCSA–
5876, to be delayed. FMCSA
acknowledges that enforcement of this
December 22, 2015, compliance date
would not provide sufficient time for
Medical Examiners to become familiar
with the new driver examination forms
and/or program electronic medical
records systems. For this reason,
FMCSA will provide a 120-day grace
period during which Medical Examiners
may use either the current or the newly
revised versions of the Medical
Examination Report Form and Medical
Examiner’s Certificate, which will be
from December 22, 2015, until April 20,
2016. Both sets of forms have been
posted on the FMCSA Web site,1 and
Medical Examiners have the option to
use either set of forms from December
22, 2015 until April 20, 2016.
Issued on: December 16, 2015.
T.F. Scott Darling, III,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015–32001 Filed 12–18–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
1 https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/medical/drivermedical-requirements/medical-applications-andforms.
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 244 (Monday, December 21, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 79267-79273]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31655]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0397; FRL-9937-18]
Pendimethalin; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
pendimethalin in or on multiple commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. Interregional Research Project Number
4 (IR-4) requested the tolerances associated with pesticide petition
number (PP) 4E8282, and BASF requested the tolerances associated with
(PP) 4F8261, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective December 21, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 19, 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-2014-0397, 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-2014-0397 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
February 19, 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
[[Page 79268]]
by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0397, by one of the following
methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of December 17, 2014 (79 FR 75107) (FRL-
9918-90), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP)
4E8282 by Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College
Road East, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR
180.361 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the
herbicide pendimethalin, [N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6-
dinitrobenzenamine], and its metabolite, 4-[(1-ethylpropyl)amino]-2-
methyl-3,5-dinitrobenzyl alcohol, in or on caneberry subgroup 13-07A at
0.10 parts per million (ppm) and bushberry subgroup 13-07B at 0.10 ppm,
and amending the existing crop group tolerance for nut, tree, group 14
to nut, tree, group 14-12. That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared on behalf of IR-4 by BASF, the registrant, which is
available in the docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0397 at https://www.regulations.gov.
In the Federal Register of August 26, 2015 (80 FR 51759) (FRL-9931-
74), 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)
4F8261 by BASF Corp., 26 Davis Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.
The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.361 be amended by establishing
tolerances for residues of the herbicide pendimethalin, [N-(1-
ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6-dinitrobenzenamine], and its metabolite,
4-[(1-ethylpropyl)amino]-2-methyl-3,5-dinitrobenzyl alcohol, in or on
milk at 0.04 parts per million (ppm); cattle, fat at 0.30 ppm; cattle,
liver at 1.5 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.1 ppm; cattle, meat byproducts,
except liver at 3.0 ppm; goat, fat at 0.30 ppm; goat, liver at 1.5 ppm;
goat, meat at 0.10 ppm; goat, meat byproducts, except liver at 3.0 ppm;
horse, fat at 0.30 ppm; horse, liver at 1.5 ppm; horse, meat at 0.10
ppm; horse, meat byproducts, except liver at 3.0 ppm; sheep, fat at
0.30 ppm; sheep, liver at 1.5 ppm; sheep, meat at 0.10 ppm; and sheep,
meat byproducts, except liver at 3.0 ppm. This petition additionally
requested that 40 CFR 180.361 be amended by revising the existing
tolerance in or on grass forage, fodder, and hay crop group 17, forage
at 1,000 ppm and grass forage, fodder, and hay crop group 17, hay at
2,000 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared
on behalf of IR-4 by BASF, the registrant, which is available in the
docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0397 at https://www.regulations.gov.
Two comments were received on these notices of filing. EPA's
response to these comments is discussed in Unit IV.C.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
revised the petitioned-for tolerance in or on cattle, meat byproduct,
meat byproduct except liver, and liver; goat, meat byproduct, meat
byproduct except liver, and liver; horse, meat byproduct, meat
byproduct except liver, and liver; and sheep, meat byproduct, meat
byproduct except liver, and liver. The Agency has determined that the
tolerance expression for the ruminant commodities is different than
that for plant commodities. Additionally, the EPA is removing existing
tolerances for Juneberry; nut, tree, group 14; and pistachio since they
are superseded by this action. The reason for these changes are
explained in Unit IV.D.
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 pendimethalin including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with pendimethalin
follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. The target organ for pendimethalin is the thyroid. Thyroid
toxicity in chronic and subchronic rat and mouse studies was manifested
as alterations in thyroid hormones (decreased total T4, and T3,
increased percent of free T4 and T3), increased thyroid weight, and
microscopic thyroid lesions (including increased thyroid follicular
cell height, follicular cell hyperplasia, as well as follicular cell
adenomas). Due to these effects, the Agency required that a
developmental thyroid assay be conducted to evaluate the impact of
pendimethalin on thyroid hormones, structure, and/or thyroid hormone
homeostasis during development. A developmental thyroid study was
submitted and demonstrated that there is no potential thyroid toxicity
following pre- and/or post-natal exposure to pendimethalin.
The points of departure (PODs) used for the chronic and short-term
risk assessments were based on co-critical studies of a 92-day thyroid
function study in rats, a 56-day thyroid study in rats, and a 14-day
intra thyroid metabolism study in rats. An uncertainty factor (UF) of
30X (3X for interspecies extrapolation and 10X for intraspecies
variation) is applied for the chronic and short-term risk assessments.
The interspecies UF which used to account for animal to human
differences in toxicokinetics and toxicodynamics
[[Page 79269]]
was reduced to 3X due to several important quantitative dynamic
differences between rats and humans with respect to thyroid function. A
UF of 100X (10X for interspecies extrapolation and 10X for intraspecies
variation) was used in the acute risk assessment because the POD was
based on an acute neurotoxicity study, not a thyroid study.
There is no evidence that pendimethalin is a developmental,
reproductive, neurotoxic, or immunotoxic chemical. There is no evidence
of increased qualitative or quantitative susceptibility in the young.
EPA classified pendimethalin as a ``Group C'', possible human
carcinogen based on a statistically significant increased trend and
pair-wise comparison between the high-dose group and controls for
thyroid follicular cell adenomas in male and female rats. A non-
quantitative approach (i.e., non-linear, reference dose (RfD) approach)
was used to assess cancer risk since mode-of-action studies are
available to demonstrate that the thyroid tumors are due to a thyroid-
pituitary imbalance, and also since pendimethalin was shown to be non-
mutagenic in mammalian somatic cells and germ cells. Specific
information on the studies received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by pendimethalin 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, ``Pendimethalin--Human Health Risk
Assessment to Support the Proposed New Uses on the Caneberry Subgroup
13-07A, and the Bushberry Subgroup 13-07B, Amended Use on Grasses and
Establishment of Tolerances for Pendimethalin in/on Grass Forage,
Fodder, and Hay (Crop Group 17) with New Ruminant Tolerances; Crop
Group Conversion for Tree Nut Crop Group 14.'' in pages 14-20 in docket
ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0397.
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://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for Pendimethalin used for
human risk assessment is discussed in the final rule published in the
Federal Register of August 29, 2012 (77 FR 52240) (FRL-9360-5).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to pendimethalin, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing pendimethalin
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.361. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
pendimethalin in food as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure.
Such effects were identified for pendimethalin. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with
the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID) Version 3.16. This
software uses 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). As to residue levels in
food, EPA used tolerance-level residues, and 100 percent crop treated
(PCT) for all commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the DEEM-FCID, Version 3.16 software with 2003-2008
food consumption data from the USDA's NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue
levels in food, EPA used tolerance-level residues, and 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) for all commodities.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that a nonlinear RfD approach is appropriate for assessing
cancer risk to pendimethalin. Cancer risk was assessed using the same
exposure estimates as discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii., chronic exposure.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for pendimethalin. Tolerance-level residues and 100
PCT were assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. In drinking water, the
residue of concern is pendimethalin parent only. The Agency used
screening-level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis
and risk assessment for pendimethalin in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and
fate/transport characteristics of pendimethalin. 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.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM GW) and
Surface Water Concentration Calculator (SWCC) models, the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of pendimethalin for acute
exposures are estimated to be 96.4 parts per billion (ppb) for surface
water and 4.38 x 10-\9\ ppb for ground water. For chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments, they are estimated to be 9.73 ppb
for surface water.
For acute dietary risk assessment, the water concentration value of
96.4 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration of value 9.73
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).
Pendimethalin is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: Turf, home gardens, and
ornamentals. EPA assessed residential exposure using the following
assumptions:
For handlers, it is assumed that residential use will
result in short-term
[[Page 79270]]
(1 to 30 days) duration dermal and inhalation exposures.
Residential post-application exposure is also assumed to
be short-term (1-30 days) in duration, resulting from the following
exposure scenarios:
[cir] Gardening: Adults (dermal) and children 6 < 11 years old
(dermal);
[cir] Physical activities on turf: Adults (dermal) and children 1-2
years old (dermal and incidental oral);
[cir] Mowing turf: Adults (dermal) and children 11 < 16 years old
(dermal); and
[cir] Exposure to golf courses during golfing: Adults (dermal),
children 11 < 16 years old (dermal), and children 6 < 11 years old
(dermal).
EPA did not combine exposure resulting from adult handler and post-
application exposure resulting from treated gardens, lawns, and/or
golfing because of the conservative assumptions and inputs within each
estimated exposure scenario. The Agency believes that combining
exposures resulting from handler and post-application activities would
result in an overestimate of adult exposure. EPA selected the most
conservative adult residential scenario (adult dermal post-application
exposure from gardening) as the contributing source of residential
exposure to be combined with the dietary exposure for the aggregate
assessment. The children's oral exposure is based on post-application
hand-to-mouth exposures. To include exposure from object-to-mouth and
soil ingestion in addition to hand-to-mouth would overestimate the
potential for oral exposure. However, there is the potential for co-
occurrence of dermal and oral exposure, since the toxicological effects
from the dermal and oral routes of exposure are the same. As a result,
the children's aggregate assessment combines post-application dermal
and oral exposure along with dietary exposure from food and water.
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
pendimethalin to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and pendimethalin does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that pendimethalin 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/cumulative-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 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. There was no indication of
pre- and/or post-natal qualitative or quantitative increased
susceptibility in the developmental studies in rats and rabbits or the
2-generation reproduction studies in rats. A developmental thyroid
toxicity study demonstrated that there is no potential thyroid toxicity
following pre- and/or post-natal exposure to pendimethalin.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for pendimethalin is complete. Although a
subchronic inhalation study was not available in the database, EPA
determined that one is not needed at this time based on a weight-of-
evidence analysis, considering the following: (1) All relevant hazard
and exposure information, which indicates its low acute inhalation
toxicity; (2) its physical/chemical properties, which indicate its low
volatility; and (3) the use of an oral POD that results in a
residential inhalation margin of exposure (MOE) more than 10X the level
of concern (in the case of pendimethalin MOE = 30 based on thyroid
POD).
ii. There is no indication that pendimethalin 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 pendimethalin 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. In addition, a developmental thyroid toxicity study demonstrated
that there is no potential thyroid toxicity following pre- and/or post-
natal exposure to pendimethalin.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100 PCT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to pendimethalin in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to assess post-application exposure
of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
pendimethalin.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and water
to pendimethalin will occupy 2% of the aPAD for all infants less than 1
year old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
pendimethalin from food and water will utilize 2.4% of the cPAD for
children 1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic
[[Page 79271]]
residential exposure to residues of pendimethalin 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).
Pendimethalin is currently registered for uses that could result in
short-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it
is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water
with short-term residential exposures to pendimethalin.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 130 for adults
and 92 for children 1 to 2 years old, the two population subgroups
receiving the greatest combined dietary and non-dietary exposure.
Because EPA's level of concern for pendimethalin is a MOE of 30 or
below, these MOEs are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
pendimethalin is not registered for any use patterns that would result
in intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for
pendimethalin.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. As discussed in Unit
III.A., EPA has determined that an RfD approach based on the chronic
point of departure is appropriate for evaluating cancer risk. As there
are not chronic aggregate risks of concern, there are no cancer
aggregate risk concerns.
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 pendimethalin residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology, gas chromatography with electron
capture detection (GC/ECD), 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.
There are currently no established Codex MRLs for the residues of
pendimethalin.
C. Response to Comments
Two comments were received to the Notices of Filing for PP 4E8282
and PP 4F8261. One commenter stated: ``Pesticide/Herbicide contents
must be made available to the public due to allergies. Labeling foods
that have been exposed to Pesticides/Herbicides protects the public
from potentially ingesting a known allergen. This safe practice allows
health care professionals to determine the cause of a life threatening
severe reaction to avoid these products in the future. I am a nurse
hence my concern.'' The second commenter stated that no residue should
be allowed for pendimethalin and that they do not support manufacture
or use of this product. The Agency understands the commenters' concerns
and recognizes that some individuals believe that pesticides should be
banned on agricultural crops. However, the existing legal framework
provided by Section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA) states that tolerances may be set when persons seeking such
tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that the pesticide meets the
safety standard imposed by that statute. These comments appear to be
directed at the underlying statute and not EPA's implementation of it;
the citizens have made no contention that EPA has acted in violation of
the statutory framework. EPA has found that there is a reasonable
certainty of no harm to humans after considering the toxicological
studies and the exposure levels of humans to pendimethalin.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
Based on review of the data supporting the petitions, EPA has
revised the petitioned-for tolerance in or on ``meat byproduct'' (at
3.0 ppm) based on anticipated residues in kidney which contained the
highest residue amongst all ruminant tissues and will therefore cover
anticipated residues in liver and fat. BASF, proposed setting a
tolerance on ``meat byproduct except liver'', also at 3.0 ppm based on
anticipated residues in kidney with a separate lower tolerance on liver
at 1.5 ppm. However, the anticipated residues in liver versus kidney,
on which the tolerance for meat byproduct is based on, are not
significantly different given the limited number of data for those
tissues and that both are greater than LOQ and within 1 ppm of each
other. Therefore, a single tolerance on ``meat byproduct'' without a
separate tolerance on liver is adequate.
Additionally, the current tolerance expression for pendimethalin
for plant commodities includes the combined residues of pendimethalin
and its 3,5-dinitrobenzyl alcohol metabolite (CL 202,347). EPA has
determined, based on the review of the ruminant feeding study, that the
residues of concern for setting tolerances and assessing risks in
ruminants is the parent compound, pendimethalin, and its metabolite, 1-
(1-ethylpropyl)-5, 6-dimethyl-7-nitro-1H-benzimidazole (also known as
metabolite 6).
Finally, the Agency is removing Juneberry at 0.1 ppm as it is
superseded by fruit, bushberry, subgroup 13-07B; as well as nut, tree,
group 14 and pistachio at 0.1 ppm to account for an updated crop group
conversion.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for plant residues by
measuring only the sum of pendimethalin, [N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-
dimethyl-2,6-dinitrobenzenamine], and its metabolite, 4-[(1-
ethylpropyl)amino]-2-methyl-3,5-dinitrobenzyl alcohol calculated as the
[[Page 79272]]
stoichiometric equivalent of pendimethalin, in or on bushberry subgroup
13-07B at 0.10 ppm; caneberry subgroup 13-07A at 0.10 ppm; grass
forage, fodder, and hay crop group 17, forage at 1,000 ppm; grass
forage, fodder, and hay crop group 17, hay at 2,000 ppm; and nut, tree
group 14-12 at 0.1 ppm. Tolerances are established for livestock
commodities is by measuring only the sum of pendimethalin, [N-(1-
ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6-dinitrobenzenamine], and its metabolite,
1-[(1-ethylpropyl)-5,6-dimethyl-7-nitro-1H-benzimidazole (metabolite
6), calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of pendimethalin in or
on cattle, fat at 0.30 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.10 ppm; cattle, meat
byproduct 3.0 ppm; goat, fat at 0.30 ppm; goat, meat at 0.10 ppm; goat,
meat byproduct at 3.0 ppm; horse, fat at 0.30 ppm; horse, meat at 0.10
ppm; horse, byproduct at 3.0 ppm; milk at 0.04 ppm; sheep, fat at 0.30
ppm; sheep, meat at 0.10 ppm; and sheep, meat byproduct at 3.0 ppm.
Additionally, the existing tolerances for Juneberry; nut, tree, group
14; and pistachio are removed.
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 tolerances in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 7, 2015.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting 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. 180.361:
0
a. Redesignate paragraph (a) as (a)(1).
0
b. In the newly redesignated paragraph (a)(1):
0
i. Remove the entries in the table for ``Grass forage, fodder, and hay
crop group 17, straw''; ``Juneberry''; ``Nut, tree group 14''; and
``Pistachio''.
0
ii. Revise the entries in the table for ``Grass, forage, fodder, and
hay crop group 17, forage'' and ``Grass, forage, fodder, and hay crop
group 17, hay''.
0
iii. Add alphabetically the entries ``Bushberry subgroup 13-07B'' and
``Caneberry subgroup 13-07A'' to the table.
0
c. Add paragraph (a)(2).
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 180.361 Pendimethalin; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. (1) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts
Commodity per
million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Bushberry subgroup 13-07B..................................... 0.10
Caneberry subgroup 13-07A..................................... 0.10
* * * * *
Grass, forage, fodder, and hay crop group 17, forage.......... 1,000
Grass, forage, fodder, and hay crop group 17, hay............. 2,000
* * * * *
Nut, tree, group 14-12........................................ 0.10
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Tolerances are established for residues of the herbicide
pendimethalin, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on
commodities listed in the following table. Compliance with the
tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring only the sum of
pendimethalin (N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6-dinitrobenzenamine))
and its metabolite, 1-(1-ethylpropyl)-5, 6-dimethyl-7-nitro-1H-
benzimidazole (metabolite 6), calculated as the stoichiometric
equivalent of pendimethalin, in or on the commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts
Commodity per
million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, fat................................................... 0.30
Cattle, meat.................................................. 0.10
Cattle, meat byproduct........................................ 3.0
Goats, fat.................................................... 0.30
[[Page 79273]]
Goats, meat................................................... 0.10
Goats, meat byproduct......................................... 3.0
Horse, fat.................................................... 0.30
Horse, meat................................................... 0.10
Horse, byproduct.............................................. 3.0
Milk.......................................................... 0.04
Sheep, fat.................................................... 0.30
Sheep, meat................................................... 0.10
Sheep, meat byproduct......................................... 3.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-31655 Filed 12-18-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P