Ammonium Persulfate; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance, 63710-63714 [2016-22366]
Download as PDF
63710
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
2. Add § 180.1338 to subpart D to read
as follows:
■
§ 180.1338 Aspergillus flavus strains
TC16F, TC35C, TC38B, and TC46G;
temporary exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance.
Temporary exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance are
established for residues of Aspergillus
flavus strains TC16F, TC35C, TC38B,
and TC46G in or on the food and feed
commodities of corn, field; corn, pop;
and corn, sweet when used in
accordance with the terms of
Experimental Use Permit No. 91163–
EUP–1. These temporary exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance
expire on June 30, 2020.
[FR Doc. 2016–22357 Filed 9–15–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
I. General Information
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0237; FRL–9951–08]
Ammonium Persulfate; Exemption
From the Requirement of a Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of ammonium
persulfate (CAS Reg. No.7727–54–0)
when used as an inert ingredient
(preservative) in pesticide formulations
applied to growing crops and raw
agricultural commodities after harvest,
etc.) at a concentration not to exceed
0.05% by weight. Exponent, Inc., on
behalf of Becker Underwood, Inc.
submitted a petition to EPA under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), requesting establishment of an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance. This regulation eliminates the
need to establish a maximum
permissible level for residues of
ammonium persulfate under the
approved conditions.
DATES: This regulation is effective
September 16, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before November 15, 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–2013–0237, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:04 Sep 15, 2016
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:
Michael Goodis, 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:
Jkt 238001
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 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–
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
OPP–2013–0237 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 November 15, 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–
2013–0237, 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. Petition for Exemption
In the Federal Register of June 5, 2013
(78 FR 33785) (FRL–9386–2), EPA
issued a document pursuant to FFDCA
section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a, announcing
the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
2E8096) by Exponent, Inc., 1150
Connecticut Ave., Suite 1100,
Washington, DC 20036, on behalf of
Becker Underwood, Inc., 801 Dayton
Avenue, Ames, IA 50010. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.910 be
amended by establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of ammonium persulfate (CAS
Reg. No. 7727–54–0) when used as an
inert ingredient (preservative) in
pesticide formulations applied to
growing crops or raw agricultural
commodities after harvest at a
concentration not to exceed 0.05% by
weight in pesticide formulations. That
document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Exponent, Inc., the
E:\FR\FM\16SER1.SGM
16SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
petitioner, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients
that are not active ingredients as defined
in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are
not limited to, the following types of
ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own):
Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as
polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and
diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose;
wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol
dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ‘‘inert’’ is not
intended to imply nontoxicity; the
ingredient may or may not be
chemically active. Generally, EPA has
exempted inert ingredients from the
requirement of a tolerance based on the
low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish an exemption
from the requirement for 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 . . . .’’
EPA establishes exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance only in those
cases where it can be clearly
demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide
chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no
appreciable risks to human health. In
order to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:04 Sep 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
toxicity of the inert in conjunction with
possible exposure to residues of the
inert ingredient through food, drinking
water, and through other exposures that
occur as a result of pesticide use in
residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a finite tolerance is not
necessary to ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be
established.
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(c)(2)(A), and the factors specified in
FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), 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 ammonium
persulfate including exposure resulting
from the exemption established by this
action. EPA’s assessment of exposures
and risks associated with ammonium
persulfate 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. Specific
information on the studies received and
the nature of the adverse effects caused
by ammonium persulfate as well as the
no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies
The acute oral and dermal rat lethal
dose (LD)50s are 495 milligram/kilogram
body weight (mg/kg bw) and >2,000 mg/
kg bw, respectively. The inhalation
lethal concentration (LC)50 for
ammonium persulfate in rats is >2,950
mg/cubic meter (m3). It is irritating to
the eyes but not the skin. It is not a
dermal sensitizer.
Several subchronic studies were
available for review for the sodium,
potassium and ammonium salts of
persulfate. In a 28 day oral (diet)
toxicity study in rats, toxicity was
manifested as decreased relative adrenal
weight at 600 parts per million (ppm)
(82 mg/kg/day). The NOAEL was 300
ppm; equal to 41 mg/kg/day. In a 3
months oral (diet) toxicity study in
dogs, toxicity was not observed at doses
up to 333 mg/kg/day, the highest dose
tested. In a toxicity study in rats,
ammonium persulfate was administered
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
63711
via inhalation for 13 weeks then
allowed a 6-week recovery period.
Toxicity was manifested as rales,
increased respiratory rate, inflammation
of the trachea and bronchi/bronchioles,
decreased body weight, and increased
lung weight at 25 mg/m3. The NOAEL
was 10.3 mg/m3.
The reproductive and developmental
toxicity of ammonium persulfate has
been tested in rats. Parental, offspring
and reproduction toxicity was not
observed at doses up to 250 mg/kg/day,
the highest dose tested.
Available mutagenicity and
genotoxicity studies included the Ames
test, gene mutation and chromosomal
aberration assays. Ammonium
persulfate produced negative results in
all of these studies.
Oral and inhalation studies of the
carcinogenic and promoting potential of
ammonium persulfate do not exist;
however, the carcinogenic and
promoting potential of ammonium
persulfate was tested in a non-guideline
study via the dermal route of exposure.
In a tumor promotion study, mice were
treated dermally with ammonium
persulfate biweekly for 51 weeks. In
another study, mice were treated
topically with a solution of 200 mg/
milliliter (mL) ammonium persulfate for
51 weeks. The incidence of tumors did
not increase in either study.
Neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity
studies were not available for review.
However, evidence of neurotoxicity and
immunotoxicity of ammonium
persulfate was not observed in the
submitted studies.
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
E:\FR\FM\16SER1.SGM
16SER1
63712
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
There was no hazard attributable to a
single exposure seen in the toxicity
database for ammonium persulfate.
Therefore, ammonium persulfate is not
expected to pose an acute risk.
The NOAEL for ammonium persulfate
was established at 300 ppm; equal to 41
mg/kg/day based on the 28-day repeat
dose oral toxicity study in rats based on
decreased relative adrenal weight at 600
ppm (82 mg/kg/day). The chronic risk
assessment for ammonium persulfate is
based on this endpoint and the chronic
reference dose (cRfD) is 0.41 mg/kg/day.
The additional Food Quality Protection
Act (FQPA) uncertainty factor of 3X is
applied for use of short-term study for
a long-term risk assessment. EPA
concluded that the uncertainty factor of
3X is adequate because the end point
selected for the risk assessment is very
conservative since no effects on absolute
adrenal weight was observed; relative
weight could be due to slight decrease
in body weight; no other systemic
toxicity was seen at this dose level and
there were no systemic toxicity
observed in a 90-day toxicity study in
dogs which considered as long term
study. Since the FQPA safety factor (SF)
has been reduced to 3X, the cPAD is
0.14 mg/kg/day. The NOAEL for
inhalation exposure has been
established as 10.3 mg/m3 (3 mg/kg/day)
based on reversible rales and respiratory
rate increases in rats. For dermal
exposures, the NOAEL for ammonium
persulfate is based on the chronic oral
NOAEL with an assumption of 100%
dermal adsorption.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to ammonium persulfate, EPA
considered exposure under the
proposed exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. EPA
assessed dietary exposures from
ammonium persulfate in food as
follows:
An acute dietary risk assessment was
not conducted because no endpoint of
concern following a single exposure was
identified in the available studies. A
chronic dietary exposure assessment
was completed and performed using the
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
DEEM–FCIDTM, Version 3.16.which
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:04 Sep 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
includes food consumption information
from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, ‘‘What
We Eat In America’’, (NHANES/
WWEIA). This dietary survey was
conducted from 2003 to 2008. In the
absence of actual residue data, the inert
ingredient evaluation is based on a
highly conservative model that assumes
that the residue level of the inert
ingredient would be no higher than the
highest established tolerance for an
active ingredient on a given commodity.
Implicit in this assumption is that there
would be similar rates of degradation
between the active and inert ingredient
(if any) and that the concentration of
inert ingredient in the scenarios leading
to these highest of tolerances would be
no higher than the concentration of the
active ingredient. The model assumes
100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all
crops and that every food eaten by a
person each day has tolerance-level
residues. A complete description of the
general approach taken to assess inert
ingredient risks in the absence of
residue data is contained in the
memorandum entitled ‘‘Alkyl Amines
Polyalkoxylates (Cluster 4): Acute and
Chronic Aggregate (Food and Drinking
Water) Dietary Exposure and Risk
Assessments for the Inerts’’ (D361707, S.
Piper, 2/25/09) and can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0738.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. For the purpose of the screening
level dietary risk assessment to support
this request for an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for
ammonium persulfate, a conservative
drinking water concentration value of
100 parts per billion (ppb) based on
screening level modeling was used to
assess the contribution to drinking
water for the chronic dietary risk
assessments for parent compound.
These values were directly entered into
the dietary exposure model.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers),
carpets, swimming pools, and hard
surface disinfection on walls, floors,
tables).
While there are no current or
proposed residential uses for
ammonium persulfate, it is possible that
ammonium persulfate may be used as
an inert ingredient in pesticide products
for which short-term and intermediateterm residential exposures may result.
In the absence of specific residential
exposure scenarios, risk estimates for
residential exposures to ammonium
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
persulfate can be modeled based on
occupational exposure assessments.
Occupational exposure assessments for
ammonium persulfate for occupational
mixer/loader/applicator exposure and
occupational post-application exposure
for comparable use scenarios (e.g., low
pressure handwand turf application)
with only baseline personal protective
equipment result in MOEs of 10,000 or
greater (i.e., exposures are not of
concern). Given the larger treatment
areas and higher concentrations used in
these occupational use pesticide
products than would be seen in
residential uses, MOEs for residential
use scenarios would exceed 1,000 or
more and therefore there are no
concerns for residential exposures to
ammonium sulfate.
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 ammonium
persulfate to share a common
mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and ammonium persulfate
does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that ammonium persulfate
does not have a common mechanism of
toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA’s efforts to
determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to
evaluate the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA 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.
E:\FR\FM\16SER1.SGM
16SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There is no evidence of increased
susceptibility of infants and children
following exposure to ammonium
persulfate. In the reproductive and
developmental toxicity study of
ammonium persulfate in rats, parental,
offspring and reproduction toxicity was
not observed at doses up to 250 mg/kg/
day, the highest dose tested.
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 3X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for
ammonium persulfate is partially
complete. The additional uncertainty
FQPA factor of 3X is applied for use of
short-term study for long term risk
assessment.
ii. There is no indication that
ammonium persulfate 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
ammonium persulfate results in
increased susceptibility in rats in utero
or in young in the reproductive and
developmental screening study.
iv. There is no evidence of any
triggers for immunotoxicity in the
available database, therefore there is no
need for an immunotoxicity study at
this time or an additional UF factor to
account for lack of an immunotoxicity
study.
v. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100% CT and
tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to ammonium
persulfate in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to
assess postapplication exposure of
children as well as incidental oral
exposure of toddlers. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by ammonium persulfate.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:04 Sep 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
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, ammonium
persulfate 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 ammonium
persulfate from food and water will
utilize <1% of the cPAD for children 1–
2 years old, the population group
receiving the greatest exposure.
3. Short- and Intermediate-term risk.
A short- & intermediate-term adverse
effect was identified for ammonium
persulfate. Short- and intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on short- and
intermediate-term residential exposure
plus chronic dietary exposure. While
there are no current or proposed
residential uses for ammonium
persulfate, it is possible that ammonium
persulfate may be used as an inert
ingredient in pesticide products for
which short- and intermediate-term
residential exposures may result.
Margins of exposure (MOEs) for shortand intermediate-term residential use
scenarios have been calculated and
exceed 10,000 or more and therefore,
since the level of concern is for MOEs
of 300 or less, there are no concerns for
residential exposures to ammonium
persulfate.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of mutagenicity and lack of
evidence of tumors in the tumor
promoting studies via dermal route, and
lack of carcinogenicity for sulfates and
ammonia (break down products),
ammonium persulfate is not expected to
pose a cancer risk to humans.
5. 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 ammonium
persulfate residues.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Although EPA is establishing a
limitation on the amount of ammonium
persulfate that may be used in pesticide
formulations, an analytical enforcement
methodology is not necessary for this
exemption from the requirement of
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
63713
tolerance. The limitation will be
enforced through the pesticide
registration process under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. EPA
will not register any pesticide for sale or
distribution for use on growing crops
with concentrations of ammonium
persulfate exceeding 0.05% by weight of
the formulation.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established a MRL
for ammonium persulfate.
VI. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance is established
under 40 CFR 180.910 for ammonium
persulfate (CAS Reg. No. 7727–54–0)
when used as an inert ingredient
(preservative) in pesticide formulations
applied to growing crops and raw
agricultural commodities after harvest at
a concentration not to exceed 0.05% by
weight.
VII. 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
E:\FR\FM\16SER1.SGM
16SER1
63714
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This action does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers,
food processors, food handlers, and food
retailers, not States or tribes, nor does
this action alter the relationships or
distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress
in the preemption provisions of FFDCA
section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency
has determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on States
or tribal governments, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this action. In addition, this action
does not impose any enforceable duty or
contain any unfunded mandate as
described under Title II of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C.
1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VIII. 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.
Inert ingredients
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: September 1, 2016.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting 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 § 180.910, add alphabetically the
following inert ingredient to the table to
read as follows:
■
§ 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and
post-harvest; exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance.
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2016–22366 Filed 9–15–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 90
[PS Docket Nos. 12–94, 06–229, 06–150;
FCC 16–117]
Implementing Public Safety Broadband
Provisions of the Middle Class Tax
Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Limits
*
*
*
*
Ammonium persulfate (CAS Reg.No. 7727–54–0) ......................................................
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).
In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) addresses the 758–769/
788–799 MHz band, which the
Commission licensed to the First
Responder Network Authority (FirstNet)
on a nationwide basis pursuant to the
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:04 Sep 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
*
0.05%
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
*
Preservative
*
provisions of the Middle Class Tax
Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012. We
provide a mechanism to facilitate the
relocation of the public safety
narrowband incumbents currently
operating on FirstNet’s spectrum. We
also affirmatively decline at this time to
impose specific build-out requirements
on FirstNet as a condition of renewal of
its license.
DATES: Effective October 17, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Roberto Mussenden, Policy and
Licensing Division, Public Safety and
Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 418–
1428.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Report
and Order in PS Docket No. 12–94, FCC
16–117, adopted on August 24, 2016
and released on August 25, 2016. The
document is available for download at
https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/.
The complete text of this document is
also available for inspection and
copying during normal business hours
PO 00000
Uses
Sfmt 4700
*
*
*
in the FCC Reference Information
Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW.,
Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554.
To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities
(Braille, large print, electronic files,
audio format), send an email to
FCC504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer &
Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202–
418–0530 (voice), 202–418–0432 (TTY).
1. In 2013, the Commission’s Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) sought
comment on implementation of certain
provisions of the Public Safety
Spectrum Act, including how to relocate
narrowband incumbents operating on
the spectrum licensed to FirstNet, and
how to address FirstNet’s renewal
expectations, including whether
FirstNet should be subject to
Commission-initiated build-out
requirements.
2. In the Report and Order, the
Commission permits narrowband
incumbents to remain on FirstNet’s
licensed spectrum until August 31,
E:\FR\FM\16SER1.SGM
16SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 180 (Friday, September 16, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63710-63714]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22366]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0237; FRL-9951-08]
Ammonium Persulfate; Exemption From the Requirement of a
Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of ammonium persulfate (CAS Reg. No.7727-
54-0) when used as an inert ingredient (preservative) in pesticide
formulations applied to growing crops and raw agricultural commodities
after harvest, etc.) at a concentration not to exceed 0.05% by weight.
Exponent, Inc., on behalf of Becker Underwood, Inc. submitted a
petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
requesting establishment of an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum
permissible level for residues of ammonium persulfate under the
approved conditions.
DATES: This regulation is effective September 16, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before November 15, 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-2013-0237, 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: Michael Goodis, 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 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-2013-0237 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
November 15, 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-2013-0237, 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. Petition for Exemption
In the Federal Register of June 5, 2013 (78 FR 33785) (FRL-9386-2),
EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a,
announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 2E8096) by Exponent,
Inc., 1150 Connecticut Ave., Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20036, on
behalf of Becker Underwood, Inc., 801 Dayton Avenue, Ames, IA 50010.
The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.910 be amended by establishing
an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of
ammonium persulfate (CAS Reg. No. 7727-54-0) when used as an inert
ingredient (preservative) in pesticide formulations applied to growing
crops or raw agricultural commodities after harvest at a concentration
not to exceed 0.05% by weight in pesticide formulations. That document
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Exponent, Inc., the
[[Page 63711]]
petitioner, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for 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 . . . .''
EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the
inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures
that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA
is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be established.
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), 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 ammonium persulfate including
exposure resulting from the exemption established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with ammonium persulfate
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. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by ammonium persulfate as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies
The acute oral and dermal rat lethal dose (LD)50s are
495 milligram/kilogram body weight (mg/kg bw) and >2,000 mg/kg bw,
respectively. The inhalation lethal concentration (LC)50 for
ammonium persulfate in rats is >2,950 mg/cubic meter (m\3\). It is
irritating to the eyes but not the skin. It is not a dermal sensitizer.
Several subchronic studies were available for review for the
sodium, potassium and ammonium salts of persulfate. In a 28 day oral
(diet) toxicity study in rats, toxicity was manifested as decreased
relative adrenal weight at 600 parts per million (ppm) (82 mg/kg/day).
The NOAEL was 300 ppm; equal to 41 mg/kg/day. In a 3 months oral (diet)
toxicity study in dogs, toxicity was not observed at doses up to 333
mg/kg/day, the highest dose tested. In a toxicity study in rats,
ammonium persulfate was administered via inhalation for 13 weeks then
allowed a 6-week recovery period. Toxicity was manifested as rales,
increased respiratory rate, inflammation of the trachea and bronchi/
bronchioles, decreased body weight, and increased lung weight at 25 mg/
m\3\. The NOAEL was 10.3 mg/m\3\.
The reproductive and developmental toxicity of ammonium persulfate
has been tested in rats. Parental, offspring and reproduction toxicity
was not observed at doses up to 250 mg/kg/day, the highest dose tested.
Available mutagenicity and genotoxicity studies included the Ames
test, gene mutation and chromosomal aberration assays. Ammonium
persulfate produced negative results in all of these studies.
Oral and inhalation studies of the carcinogenic and promoting
potential of ammonium persulfate do not exist; however, the
carcinogenic and promoting potential of ammonium persulfate was tested
in a non-guideline study via the dermal route of exposure. In a tumor
promotion study, mice were treated dermally with ammonium persulfate
biweekly for 51 weeks. In another study, mice were treated topically
with a solution of 200 mg/milliliter (mL) ammonium persulfate for 51
weeks. The incidence of tumors did not increase in either study.
Neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity studies were not available for
review. However, evidence of neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity of
ammonium persulfate was not observed in the submitted studies.
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
[[Page 63712]]
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency estimates risk in terms of the
probability of an occurrence of the adverse effect expected in a
lifetime. For more information on the general principles EPA uses in
risk characterization and a complete description of the risk assessment
process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
There was no hazard attributable to a single exposure seen in the
toxicity database for ammonium persulfate. Therefore, ammonium
persulfate is not expected to pose an acute risk.
The NOAEL for ammonium persulfate was established at 300 ppm; equal
to 41 mg/kg/day based on the 28-day repeat dose oral toxicity study in
rats based on decreased relative adrenal weight at 600 ppm (82 mg/kg/
day). The chronic risk assessment for ammonium persulfate is based on
this endpoint and the chronic reference dose (cRfD) is 0.41 mg/kg/day.
The additional Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) uncertainty factor of
3X is applied for use of short-term study for a long-term risk
assessment. EPA concluded that the uncertainty factor of 3X is adequate
because the end point selected for the risk assessment is very
conservative since no effects on absolute adrenal weight was observed;
relative weight could be due to slight decrease in body weight; no
other systemic toxicity was seen at this dose level and there were no
systemic toxicity observed in a 90-day toxicity study in dogs which
considered as long term study. Since the FQPA safety factor (SF) has
been reduced to 3X, the cPAD is 0.14 mg/kg/day. The NOAEL for
inhalation exposure has been established as 10.3 mg/m\3\ (3 mg/kg/day)
based on reversible rales and respiratory rate increases in rats. For
dermal exposures, the NOAEL for ammonium persulfate is based on the
chronic oral NOAEL with an assumption of 100% dermal adsorption.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to ammonium persulfate, EPA considered exposure under the
proposed exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. EPA assessed
dietary exposures from ammonium persulfate in food as follows:
An acute dietary risk assessment was not conducted because no
endpoint of concern following a single exposure was identified in the
available studies. A chronic dietary exposure assessment was completed
and performed using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model DEEM-
FCID\TM\, Version 3.16.which includes food consumption information from
the U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, ``What We Eat In America'', (NHANES/WWEIA). This
dietary survey was conducted from 2003 to 2008. In the absence of
actual residue data, the inert ingredient evaluation is based on a
highly conservative model that assumes that the residue level of the
inert ingredient would be no higher than the highest established
tolerance for an active ingredient on a given commodity. Implicit in
this assumption is that there would be similar rates of degradation
between the active and inert ingredient (if any) and that the
concentration of inert ingredient in the scenarios leading to these
highest of tolerances would be no higher than the concentration of the
active ingredient. The model assumes 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for
all crops and that every food eaten by a person each day has tolerance-
level residues. A complete description of the general approach taken to
assess inert ingredient risks in the absence of residue data is
contained in the memorandum entitled ``Alkyl Amines Polyalkoxylates
(Cluster 4): Acute and Chronic Aggregate (Food and Drinking Water)
Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessments for the Inerts'' (D361707, S.
Piper, 2/25/09) and can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0738.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. For the purpose of the
screening level dietary risk assessment to support this request for an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for ammonium persulfate,
a conservative drinking water concentration value of 100 parts per
billion (ppb) based on screening level modeling was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water for the chronic dietary risk assessments
for parent compound. These values were directly entered into the
dietary exposure model.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming
pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables).
While there are no current or proposed residential uses for
ammonium persulfate, it is possible that ammonium persulfate may be
used as an inert ingredient in pesticide products for which short-term
and intermediate-term residential exposures may result. In the absence
of specific residential exposure scenarios, risk estimates for
residential exposures to ammonium persulfate can be modeled based on
occupational exposure assessments. Occupational exposure assessments
for ammonium persulfate for occupational mixer/loader/applicator
exposure and occupational post-application exposure for comparable use
scenarios (e.g., low pressure handwand turf application) with only
baseline personal protective equipment result in MOEs of 10,000 or
greater (i.e., exposures are not of concern). Given the larger
treatment areas and higher concentrations used in these occupational
use pesticide products than would be seen in residential uses, MOEs for
residential use scenarios would exceed 1,000 or more and therefore
there are no concerns for residential exposures to ammonium sulfate.
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 ammonium persulfate to share a common mechanism
of toxicity with any other substances, and ammonium persulfate does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For
the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
ammonium persulfate does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA 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.
[[Page 63713]]
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no evidence of
increased susceptibility of infants and children following exposure to
ammonium persulfate. In the reproductive and developmental toxicity
study of ammonium persulfate in rats, parental, offspring and
reproduction toxicity was not observed at doses up to 250 mg/kg/day,
the highest dose tested.
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 3X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for ammonium persulfate is partially
complete. The additional uncertainty FQPA factor of 3X is applied for
use of short-term study for long term risk assessment.
ii. There is no indication that ammonium persulfate 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 ammonium persulfate results in
increased susceptibility in rats in utero or in young in the
reproductive and developmental screening study.
iv. There is no evidence of any triggers for immunotoxicity in the
available database, therefore there is no need for an immunotoxicity
study at this time or an additional UF factor to account for lack of an
immunotoxicity study.
v. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100% CT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to ammonium persulfate in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure
of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
ammonium persulfate.
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,
ammonium persulfate 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
ammonium persulfate from food and water will utilize <1% of the cPAD
for children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
3. Short- and Intermediate-term risk. A short- & intermediate-term
adverse effect was identified for ammonium persulfate. Short- and
intermediate-term risk is assessed based on short- and intermediate-
term residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure. While there
are no current or proposed residential uses for ammonium persulfate, it
is possible that ammonium persulfate may be used as an inert ingredient
in pesticide products for which short- and intermediate-term
residential exposures may result. Margins of exposure (MOEs) for short-
and intermediate-term residential use scenarios have been calculated
and exceed 10,000 or more and therefore, since the level of concern is
for MOEs of 300 or less, there are no concerns for residential
exposures to ammonium persulfate.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of mutagenicity and lack of evidence of tumors in the tumor
promoting studies via dermal route, and lack of carcinogenicity for
sulfates and ammonia (break down products), ammonium persulfate is not
expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
5. 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 ammonium persulfate residues.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Although EPA is establishing a limitation on the amount of ammonium
persulfate that may be used in pesticide formulations, an analytical
enforcement methodology is not necessary for this exemption from the
requirement of tolerance. The limitation will be enforced through the
pesticide registration process under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. EPA will
not register any pesticide for sale or distribution for use on growing
crops with concentrations of ammonium persulfate exceeding 0.05% by
weight of the formulation.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established a MRL for ammonium persulfate.
VI. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established under 40 CFR 180.910 for ammonium persulfate (CAS Reg. No.
7727-54-0) when used as an inert ingredient (preservative) in pesticide
formulations applied to growing crops and raw agricultural commodities
after harvest at a concentration not to exceed 0.05% by weight.
VII. 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
[[Page 63714]]
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any special
considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions
to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VIII. 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: September 1, 2016.
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. 180.910, add alphabetically the following inert ingredient
to the table to read as follows:
Sec. 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inert ingredients Limits Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Ammonium persulfate (CAS Reg.No. 0.05% Preservative
7727-54-0).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2016-22366 Filed 9-15-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P