Flupyradifurone; Pesticide Tolerances, 65552-65557 [2016-22976]
Download as PDF
65552
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance number and title for the
program affected by this document is
64.114, Veterans Housing—Guaranteed
and Insured Loans.
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or
designee, approved this document and
authorized the undersigned to sign and
submit the document to the Office of the
Federal Register for publication
electronically as an official document of
the Department of Veterans Affairs. Gina
S. Farrisee, Deputy Chief of Staff,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
approved this document on September
16, 2016, for publication.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Parts 36 and
42
Condominiums, Housing, Individuals
with disabilities, Loan programshousing and community development,
Loan programs-veterans, Manufactured
homes, Mortgage insurance, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements,
Veterans.
PART 36—LOAN GUARANTY
PART 42—STANDARDS
IMPLEMENTING THE PROGRAM
FRAUD CIVIL REMEDIES ACT
Accordingly, the interim rule
amending 38 CFR parts 36 and 42 which
was published at 81 FR 40523 on June
22, 2016, is adopted as a final rule
without change.
■
Dated: September 16, 2016.
Michael Shores
Acting Director, Regulation Policy &
Management Office of the Secretary
Department of Veterans Affairs
[FR Doc. 2016–22732 Filed 9–22–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0226; FRL–9951–68]
Flupyradifurone; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of
flupyradifurone in or on multiple
commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. Bayer
CropScience LP requested these
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:10 Sep 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
September 23, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before November 22, 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–2013–0226, 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 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-
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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–2013–0226 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 22, 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–
2013–0226, 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 March 16,
2016 (81 FR 14030) (FRL–9942–86),
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 5F8404) by Bayer
CropScience LP, 2 T.W. Alexander
E:\FR\FM\23SER1.SGM
23SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Drive, P.O. Box 12014, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition
requested that 40 CFR part 180 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the insecticide,
flupyradifurone, in or on abiu at 0.6
parts per million (ppm); akee apple at
0.6 ppm; avocado at 0.6 ppm; bacury at
0.6 ppm; banana at 0.6 ppm; binjai at
0.6 ppm; caneberry, subgroup 13–07A at
5 ppm; canistel at 0.6 ppm; cilantro,
´
fresh leaves at 30 ppm; cupuacu at 0.6
´
ppm; etambe at 0.6 ppm; jatoba at 0.6
ppm; kava, fresh leaves at 40 ppm; kava,
roots at 0.9 ppm; kei apple at 0.6 ppm;
langstat at 0.6 ppm; lanjut at 0.6 ppm;
lucuma at 0.6 ppm; mabolo at 0.6 ppm;
mango at 0.6 ppm; mangosteen at 0.6
ppm; paho at 0.6 ppm; papaya at 0.6
ppm; pawpaw, common at 0.6 ppm;
pelipisan at 0.6 ppm; pequi at 0.6 ppm;
pequia at 0.6 ppm; persimmon,
american at 0.6 ppm; plantain at 0.6
ppm; pomegranate at 0.6 ppm; poshte at
0.6 ppm; quandong at 0.6 ppm; quinoa
at 3 ppm; sapote at 0.6 ppm; sataw at
0.6 ppm; screw-pine at 0.6 ppm; star
apple at 0.6 ppm; stone fruit, stone
group 12–12 at 1.5 ppm; tamarind-ofthe-Indies at 0.6 ppm; and wild loquat
at 0.6 ppm. That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by
Bayer CropScience LP, the registrant,
which is available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. Comments were
received on the notice 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
modified some of the commodity
definitions that were proposed. 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:10 Sep 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
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 flupyradifurone
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with flupyradifurone 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 most sensitive effects seen in the
flupyradifurone database were skeletal
muscle atrophy/degeneration in dogs.
With repeated dosing, reductions in
body weight and food consumption
were commonly seen in various studies
and in all species of test animals (rats,
mice, dogs, and rabbits). The liver and
thyroid were shown to be the common
findings of flupyradifurone toxicity. The
database appears to suggest that dogs are
more sensitive to the effects of
flupyradifurone; however, with body
weight adjustments (based on a 3⁄4
scaling factor), the dog and rat are
almost equally as sensitive in response
to flupyradifurone toxicity. The skeletal
muscle atrophy/degeneration seen in
the 90-day and 1-year dog studies
formed the basis for chronic dietary
exposure toxicity endpoints.
The developmental toxicity study in
rats demonstrated no evidence of
susceptibility in developing animals. In
the rabbit developmental toxicity study,
there was an increase in the incidence
of fetal death at 80 milligram/kilogram/
day (mg/kg/day) (the highest dose
tested), a dose that did not produce
adverse effects in the maternal animals.
Therefore, a quantitative increase in
susceptibility was demonstrated in the
rabbit developmental toxicity study. In
the 2-generation reproduction study in
rats, decreased parental body weights
(≥10%) were seen at the lowestobserved-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL)
of 137 mg/kg/day (parental no-observedadverse-effect-level (NOAEL) = 37.8 mg/
kg/day). In contrast, body weight
decreases that were considered adverse
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
65553
were seen in F2 pups at 37.8 mg/kg/day
(the parental NOAEL and the offspring
LOAEL; offspring NOAEL = 7.7 mg/kg/
day). These findings suggest
quantitative susceptibility for
developing young animals.
The acute neurotoxicity study (dosing
by gavage) showed that at the time of
peak-effect, flupyradifurone caused
increases in the incidence of
piloerection and dilated pupils at 50
mg/kg. At the next higher dose level
(200 mg/kg) and above, it produced a
large host of clinical signs, which were
related to neurotoxicity. The clinical
signs included dilated pupils, lower
muscle tone, low arousal, tremors,
myoclonic jerks, chewing, repetitive
licking of lips, gait incoordination,
flattened or hunched posture, and
impaired righting reflex. In the 90-day
neurotoxicity study, no neurotoxicity or
other adverse effects were seen at dose
levels as high as 174 mg/kg/day. The
developmental neurotoxicity study at
102 mg/kg/day yielded an increased
incidence of increased amplitude in
startle response.
Flupyradifurone is classified as ‘‘not
likely to be carcinogenic to humans.’’
Carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice
did not yield a compound-related
increase in tumor incidence, and the
genotoxicity battery did not show
flupyradifurone to produce any
genotoxicity. Flupyradifurone did not
demonstrate any immunotoxic effects.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by flupyradifurone as
well as the NOAEL and the LOAEL from
the toxicity studies can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov in the
document titled ‘‘Flupyradifurone
(122304) Human Health Risk
Assessment in Support of Proposed
Uses on Kava, Cilantro, Stone Fruit,
Group 12–12, Caneberry, Subgroup 13–
07A, Quinoa, and Tropical Fruits;
Amended Use Requests for Soil
Applications to Leafy Vegetables, Group
4 and Brassica (Cole) Leafy Vegetables,
Group 5; Use on Greenhouse Grown
Tomato, Pepper, Cucumber, and
Lettuce; Label Amendment to Add
Commodities of Tree Nuts, Group 14–12
to label; and Label Amendment to Add
Use Directions for Clover Grown for
Forage, Fodder, Seed, Straw, and Hay’’
on page 49 in docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPP–2013–0226.
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
E:\FR\FM\23SER1.SGM
23SER1
65554
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
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-andassessing-pesticide-risks/assessinghuman-health-risk-pesticides.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for flupyradifurone used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR FLUPYRADIFURONE FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH
RISK ASSESSMENT
Exposure/scenario
Point of departure
and
uncertainty/safety
factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
Acute neurotoxicity study—rat
LOAEL = 50 mg/kg/day based on increased incidences of
piloerection in both sexes and pupil dilation in females on
Day 1. At the next higher dose level (200 mg/kg) or above,
lower muscle tone, rapid respiration, low arousal, tremors,
myoclonic jerks, chewing, repetitive licking of lips, gait
incoordination, flattened or hunched posture, dilated pupils,
impaired (uncoordinated or slow) righting reflex, impaired
flexor and tail pinch responses and reduced rectal temperature. Automated measures of motor activity were also reduced in both sexes, compared to controls.
Oral toxicity study—dog (1-year)
LOAEL = 28 mg/kg/day based on minimal to slight, focal to
multifocal areas of skeletal muscle degeneration in gastrocnemius and/or biceps femoris muscle.
Acute dietary (All populations) ..
NOAEL = 35 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10 ×
UFH = 10 ×
FQPA SF = 1 ×
Acute RfD = 0.35
mg/kg/day.
aPAD = 0.35 mg/kg/
day.
Chronic dietary (All populations)
NOAEL= 7.8 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10 ×
UFH = 10 ×
FQPA SF = 1 ×
Dermal (or oral)
study NOAEL = 12
mg/kg/day (dermal
absorption rate =
7.42%.
UFA = 10 ×
UFH = 10 ×
FQPA SF = 1 ×
Oral study NOAEL =
12 mg/kg/day (inhalation absorption
rate = 100%).
UFA = 10 ×
UFH = 10 ×
FQPA SF = 1 ×
Chronic RfD = 0.078
mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.078 mg/
kg/day.
Dermal short-term (1 to 30
days).
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30
days).
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).
LOC for MOE = 100
Oral toxicity study—dog (90-day)
LOAEL = 33 mg/kg/day based skeletal muscle atrophy/degeneration.
2-Generation reproduction study—rat (co-critical study)
NOAEL = 7.7 mg/kg/day.
Offspring LOAEL = 38.7 mg/kg/day based on pup body weight
decrease.
LOC for MOE = 100
Oral toxicity study—dog (90-day)
LOAEL = 33 mg/kg/day based on skeletal muscle atrophy/degeneration.
2-Generation reproduction study—rat (co-critical study)
NOAEL = 7.7 mg/kg/day.
Offspring LOAEL = 38.7 mg/kg/day based on pup body weight
decrease.
Classification: Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans—based on data showing no treatment-related increase
in tumors incidence in rat and mouse carcinogenicity studies. No mutagenic concern was reported in the
genotoxicity studies.
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day =
milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c =
chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in
sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to flupyradifurone, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing flupyradifurone tolerances in
40 CFR 180.679. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from flupyradifurone in food
as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:10 Sep 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
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
flupyradifurone. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food
consumption data from the United
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
States Department of Agriculture’s
(USDA’s) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America (NHANES/WWEIA; 2003–
2008). As to residue levels in food, EPA
assumed 100% crop treated (PCT),
tolerance level residues and Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM)
(ver. 7.81) default processing factors.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
E:\FR\FM\23SER1.SGM
23SER1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA’s NHANES/WWEIA;
2003–2008. As to residue levels in food,
EPA assumed 100 PCT, tolerance level
residues and DEEM (ver. 7.81) default
processing factors.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that flupyradifurone does not
pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore,
a dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue or PCT information
in the dietary assessment for
flupyradifurone. Tolerance level
residues and 100 PCT were assumed for
all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for flupyradifurone in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
flupyradifurone. 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/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS), Tier 1 Rice
Model and Pesticide Root Zone Model
Ground Water (PRZM GW) model, the
estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) of flupyradifurone for acute
exposures are estimated to be 112 parts
per billion (ppb) for surface water and
352 ppb for ground water, and for
chronic exposures are estimated to be
112 ppb for surface water and 307 ppb
for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For the
acute dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value of 352 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For the chronic dietary
risk assessment, the water concentration
of value 307 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).
Currently there are no registered uses
for flupyradifurone that could result in
residential exposures. However, there is
a proposal to register uses that could
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:10 Sep 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
result in residential exposures for
application to ornamental plants
(gardens, trees, shrubs, flowers).
Therefore, the EPA considered the
proposed residential uses and assessed
residential exposure using the following
assumptions: For residential handlers,
short-term dermal and inhalation
exposures were assessed for adults
mixing, loading and applying liquids
and ready to use formulations to
gardens and trees using a variety of
application equipment. For postapplication exposure, short-term dermal
exposures to adults and children (6 to
<11 years old) to gardens, trees, and
retail plants and indoor plants was
evaluated. Only short-term residential
exposures are expected. Further
information regarding EPA standard
assumptions and generic inputs for
residential exposures may be found at
https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-scienceand-assessing-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 flupyradifurone to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
flupyradifurone does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that flupyradifurone does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity
with other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at https://
www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/cumulativeassessment-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
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
65555
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 is no evidence that
flupyradifurone produces increased
susceptibility in in the rat
developmental study. There is
quantitative increase in susceptibility in
the rabbit developmental and rat
reproduction studies. In the rabbit
developmental study, no maternal effect
was seen at the highest tested dose (80
mg/kg/day), while there was an increase
in fetal death and decrease fetal body
weight at the same dose level. In the rat
reproduction study, maternal effect,
decrease in body weight, was seen at
137 mg/kg/day, whereas decreases in
pup body weight was seen at the next
lower dose, 38.7 mg/kg/day or above.
However, the PODs selected for risk
assessment are protective of the
quantitative susceptibility seen in the
rabbit fetuses and rat pups.
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
flupyradifurone is complete.
ii. Although there is evidence that
flupyradifurone has neurotoxic effects,
EPA has a complete set of neurotoxicity
studies (acute, subchronic, and
developmental). The effects of those
studies are well-characterized and
indicate neurotoxic effects that occur at
levels above the chronic POD that was
selected for risk assessment. The
NOAEL for the acute neurotoxicity
study is being used for the acute POD.
Therefore, there is no need to retain the
10X FQPA SF to account for any
uncertainty concerning these effects.
iii. There is no evidence that
flupyradifurone results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats. There is
quantitative increase in susceptibility in
the rabbit developmental and rat
reproduction studies. However, the
PODs selected for risk assessment are
protective of the quantitative
susceptibility seen in the rabbit fetuses
and rat pups.
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
E:\FR\FM\23SER1.SGM
23SER1
65556
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
flupyradifurone in drinking water. EPA
used similarly conservative assumptions
to assess the proposed residential postapplication exposure of children. These
assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by
flupyradifurone.
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
flupyradifurone will occupy 37% of the
aPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to
flupyradifurone from food and water
will utilize 86% of the cPAD for
children 1–2 years old, the population
group receiving the greatest exposure.
Based on the explanation in Unit
III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of flupyradifurone 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). For flupyradifurone
there are uses pending which the
Agency has included in this action 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 flupyradifurone.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined short-term food, water, and
proposed residential exposures result in
aggregate MOEs of 170 for adults and
190 for children (6 to <11 years old).
Because EPA’s level of concern for
flupyradifurone is a MOE of 100 or
below, these MOEs are not of concern.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:10 Sep 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
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,
flupyradifurone 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 intermediateterm risk), no further assessment of
intermediate-term risk is necessary, and
EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk
assessment for evaluating intermediateterm risk for flupyradifurone.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
flupyradifurone is not expected to pose
a cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to
flupyradifurone residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An adequate analytical method
(Method RV–001–P10–03) which uses
high-performance liquid
chromatography with tandem mass
spectrometry (HPLC/MS/MS) to
quantitate residues of flupyradifurone
and difluoroacetic acid (DFA) in various
crops is available for enforcement.
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).
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 any
MRLs for flupyradifurone.
C. Response to Comments
EPA received two comments to the
Notice of Filing. The first stated, in part,
that EPA should deny this petition
because it is a harmful and toxic
chemical. The Agency understands the
commenter’s 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. EPA has assessed the effects
of this chemical on human health and
determined that aggregate exposure to it
will be safe. This citizen’s comment
appears to be directed at the underlying
statute and not EPA’s implementation of
it; the citizen has made no contention
that EPA has acted in violation of the
statutory framework.
The second comment was from
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4) and was in support of the
petition.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
Bayer CropScience LP petitioned for
tolerances on abiu, akee apple, avocado,
bacury, banana, binjai, canistel,
´
´
cupuacu, etambe, jatoba, kei apple,
langstat, lanjut, lucuma, mabolo, mango,
mangosteen, paho, papaya, common
pawpaw, pelipisan, pequi, pequia,
American persimmon, plantain,
pomegranate, poshte, quandong, sapote,
sataw, screw-pine, star apple, tamarindof-the-Indies, and wild loquat. These
commodities are all listed in the newly
established crop subgroup 24B for
tropical and subtropical, medium to
large fruit, with a smooth, inedible peel.
Subgroup 24B further breaks out the
different types of avocado (to include
Guatemalan, Mexican, and West Indian
avocado), mango (to include horse and
Saipan mango), and sapote (to include
E:\FR\FM\23SER1.SGM
23SER1
65557
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
black, green, and white sapote).
Although the petitioner did not specify
any particular kind of avocado, mango,
and sapote, the Agency considers the
request for avocado, mango, and sapote
to be general in nature and include all
varieties of those commodities. As a
result, the requested commodities align
with the commodities contained in the
new subgroup 24B.
In the Federal Register of May 3, 2016
(81 FR 26471) (FRL–9944–87)
establishing that crop group, EPA
indicated that, for existing petitions for
which a Notice of Filing had been
published, the Agency would attempt to
conform these petitions to the rule.
Therefore, consistent with this rule,
EPA is establishing tolerances on crop
subgroup 24B, the tropical and
subtropical, medium to large fruit,
smooth, inedible peel subgroup, rather
than all the commodities individually.
EPA’s dietary and aggregate risk
assessments are based on data from the
required representative commodities
and account for flupyradifurone
exposure from all of the subgroup 24B
commodities.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of flupyradifurone,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on caneberry subgroup
13–07A at 5.0 ppm; cilantro, fresh
leaves at 30 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12–
12 at 1.5 ppm; kava, fresh leaves at 40
ppm; kava, roots at 0.90 ppm; quinoa,
grain at 3.0 ppm; and the tropical and
subtropical, medium to large fruit,
smooth, inedible peel subgroup 24B at
0.60 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes tolerances
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this action is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This action does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:10 Sep 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers,
food processors, food handlers, and food
retailers, not States or tribes, nor does
this action alter the relationships or
distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress
in the preemption provisions of FFDCA
section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency
has determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on States
or tribal governments, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this action. In addition, this action
does not impose any enforceable duty or
contain any unfunded mandate as
described under Title II of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C.
1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: September 14, 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 § 180.679, add alphabetically the
commodities ‘‘Caneberry subgroup 13–
07A’’; ‘‘Cilantro, fresh leaves’’; ‘‘Fruit,
stone, group 12–12’’; ‘‘Kava, fresh
leaves’’; ‘‘Kava, roots’’; ‘‘Quinoa, grain’’;
and ‘‘Tropical and subtropical, medium
to large fruit, smooth, inedible peel
subgroup 24B’’ to the table in paragraph
(a) to read as follows:
■
§ 180.679 Flupyradifurone; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
*
*
*
Caneberry subgroup 13–07A
*
*
*
*
Cilantro, fresh leaves ............
*
*
*
*
Fruit, stone, group 12–12 .....
*
*
*
*
Kava, fresh leaves ................
Kava, roots ...........................
*
*
*
*
Quinoa, grain ........................
*
*
*
*
Tropical and subtropical, medium to large fruit, smooth,
inedible peel subgroup
24B ....................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\23SER1.SGM
23SER1
*
5.0
*
30
*
1.5
*
40
0.90
*
3.0
*
0.60
*
*
[FR Doc. 2016–22976 Filed 9–22–16; 8:45 am]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
PO 00000
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 185 (Friday, September 23, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65552-65557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22976]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0226; FRL-9951-68]
Flupyradifurone; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
flupyradifurone in or on multiple commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. Bayer CropScience LP requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective September 23, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before November 22, 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-2013-0226, 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 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-2013-0226 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 22, 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-2013-0226, 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 March 16, 2016 (81 FR 14030) (FRL-9942-
86), 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
5F8404) by Bayer CropScience LP, 2 T.W. Alexander
[[Page 65553]]
Drive, P.O. Box 12014, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition
requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing tolerances
for residues of the insecticide, flupyradifurone, in or on abiu at 0.6
parts per million (ppm); akee apple at 0.6 ppm; avocado at 0.6 ppm;
bacury at 0.6 ppm; banana at 0.6 ppm; binjai at 0.6 ppm; caneberry,
subgroup 13-07A at 5 ppm; canistel at 0.6 ppm; cilantro, fresh leaves
at 30 ppm; cupuac[uacute] at 0.6 ppm; etambe at 0.6 ppm; jatob[aacute]
at 0.6 ppm; kava, fresh leaves at 40 ppm; kava, roots at 0.9 ppm; kei
apple at 0.6 ppm; langstat at 0.6 ppm; lanjut at 0.6 ppm; lucuma at 0.6
ppm; mabolo at 0.6 ppm; mango at 0.6 ppm; mangosteen at 0.6 ppm; paho
at 0.6 ppm; papaya at 0.6 ppm; pawpaw, common at 0.6 ppm; pelipisan at
0.6 ppm; pequi at 0.6 ppm; pequia at 0.6 ppm; persimmon, american at
0.6 ppm; plantain at 0.6 ppm; pomegranate at 0.6 ppm; poshte at 0.6
ppm; quandong at 0.6 ppm; quinoa at 3 ppm; sapote at 0.6 ppm; sataw at
0.6 ppm; screw-pine at 0.6 ppm; star apple at 0.6 ppm; stone fruit,
stone group 12-12 at 1.5 ppm; tamarind-of-the-Indies at 0.6 ppm; and
wild loquat at 0.6 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Bayer CropScience LP, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. Comments were
received on the notice 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
modified some of the commodity definitions that were proposed. 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 flupyradifurone including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with flupyradifurone
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 most sensitive effects seen in the flupyradifurone database
were skeletal muscle atrophy/degeneration in dogs. With repeated
dosing, reductions in body weight and food consumption were commonly
seen in various studies and in all species of test animals (rats, mice,
dogs, and rabbits). The liver and thyroid were shown to be the common
findings of flupyradifurone toxicity. The database appears to suggest
that dogs are more sensitive to the effects of flupyradifurone;
however, with body weight adjustments (based on a \3/4\ scaling
factor), the dog and rat are almost equally as sensitive in response to
flupyradifurone toxicity. The skeletal muscle atrophy/degeneration seen
in the 90-day and 1-year dog studies formed the basis for chronic
dietary exposure toxicity endpoints.
The developmental toxicity study in rats demonstrated no evidence
of susceptibility in developing animals. In the rabbit developmental
toxicity study, there was an increase in the incidence of fetal death
at 80 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) (the highest dose tested), a
dose that did not produce adverse effects in the maternal animals.
Therefore, a quantitative increase in susceptibility was
demonstrated in the rabbit developmental toxicity study. In the 2-
generation reproduction study in rats, decreased parental body weights
(>=10%) were seen at the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL)
of 137 mg/kg/day (parental no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) =
37.8 mg/kg/day). In contrast, body weight decreases that were
considered adverse were seen in F2 pups at 37.8 mg/kg/day (the parental
NOAEL and the offspring LOAEL; offspring NOAEL = 7.7 mg/kg/day). These
findings suggest quantitative susceptibility for developing young
animals.
The acute neurotoxicity study (dosing by gavage) showed that at the
time of peak-effect, flupyradifurone caused increases in the incidence
of piloerection and dilated pupils at 50 mg/kg. At the next higher dose
level (200 mg/kg) and above, it produced a large host of clinical
signs, which were related to neurotoxicity. The clinical signs included
dilated pupils, lower muscle tone, low arousal, tremors, myoclonic
jerks, chewing, repetitive licking of lips, gait incoordination,
flattened or hunched posture, and impaired righting reflex. In the 90-
day neurotoxicity study, no neurotoxicity or other adverse effects were
seen at dose levels as high as 174 mg/kg/day. The developmental
neurotoxicity study at 102 mg/kg/day yielded an increased incidence of
increased amplitude in startle response.
Flupyradifurone is classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to
humans.'' Carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice did not yield a
compound-related increase in tumor incidence, and the genotoxicity
battery did not show flupyradifurone to produce any genotoxicity.
Flupyradifurone did not demonstrate any immunotoxic effects.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by flupyradifurone as well as the NOAEL and the
LOAEL from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in the document titled ``Flupyradifurone (122304)
Human Health Risk Assessment in Support of Proposed Uses on Kava,
Cilantro, Stone Fruit, Group 12-12, Caneberry, Subgroup 13-07A, Quinoa,
and Tropical Fruits; Amended Use Requests for Soil Applications to
Leafy Vegetables, Group 4 and Brassica (Cole) Leafy Vegetables, Group
5; Use on Greenhouse Grown Tomato, Pepper, Cucumber, and Lettuce; Label
Amendment to Add Commodities of Tree Nuts, Group 14-12 to label; and
Label Amendment to Add Use Directions for Clover Grown for Forage,
Fodder, Seed, Straw, and Hay'' on page 49 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2013-0226.
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
[[Page 65554]]
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 flupyradifurone used
for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Flupyradifurone for Use in Human Health Risk
Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure
Exposure/scenario and uncertainty/ RfD, PAD, LOC for Study and toxicological effects
safety factors risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (All populations).. NOAEL = 35 mg/kg/day Acute RfD = 0.35 mg/ Acute neurotoxicity study--rat
UFA = 10 x.......... kg/day. LOAEL = 50 mg/kg/day based on
UFH = 10 x.......... aPAD = 0.35 mg/kg/ increased incidences of
FQPA SF = 1 x....... day. piloerection in both sexes and
pupil dilation in females on Day
1. At the next higher dose level
(200 mg/kg) or above, lower
muscle tone, rapid respiration,
low arousal, tremors, myoclonic
jerks, chewing, repetitive
licking of lips, gait
incoordination, flattened or
hunched posture, dilated pupils,
impaired (uncoordinated or slow)
righting reflex, impaired flexor
and tail pinch responses and
reduced rectal temperature.
Automated measures of motor
activity were also reduced in
both sexes, compared to controls.
Chronic dietary (All populations) NOAEL= 7.8 mg/kg/day Chronic RfD = 0.078 Oral toxicity study--dog (1-year)
UFA = 10 x.......... mg/kg/day. LOAEL = 28 mg/kg/day based on
UFH = 10 x.......... cPAD = 0.078 mg/kg/ minimal to slight, focal to
FQPA SF = 1 x....... day. multifocal areas of skeletal
muscle degeneration in
gastrocnemius and/or biceps
femoris muscle.
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days). Dermal (or oral) LOC for MOE = 100.. Oral toxicity study--dog (90-day)
study NOAEL = 12 mg/ LOAEL = 33 mg/kg/day based
kg/day (dermal skeletal muscle atrophy/
absorption rate = degeneration.
7.42%. 2-Generation reproduction study--
UFA = 10 x.......... rat (co-critical study)
UFH = 10 x.......... NOAEL = 7.7 mg/kg/day.
FQPA SF = 1 x....... Offspring LOAEL = 38.7 mg/kg/day
based on pup body weight
decrease.
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 Oral study NOAEL = LOC for MOE = 100.. Oral toxicity study--dog (90-day)
days). 12 mg/kg/day LOAEL = 33 mg/kg/day based on
(inhalation skeletal muscle atrophy/
absorption rate = degeneration.
100%). 2-Generation reproduction study--
UFA = 10 x.......... rat (co-critical study)
UFH = 10 x.......... NOAEL = 7.7 mg/kg/day.
FQPA SF = 1 x....... Offspring LOAEL = 38.7 mg/kg/day
based on pup body weight
decrease.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans--based on data
showing no treatment-related increase in tumors incidence in rat and mouse
carcinogenicity studies. No mutagenic concern was reported in the
genotoxicity studies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level
of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-
level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor.
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among
members of the human population (intraspecies).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to flupyradifurone, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing flupyradifurone
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.679. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
flupyradifurone 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 flupyradifurone. In estimating
acute dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption data from the United
States Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA;
2003-2008). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed 100% crop treated
(PCT), tolerance level residues and Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
(DEEM) (ver. 7.81) default processing factors.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment
[[Page 65555]]
EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA's NHANES/WWEIA; 2003-
2008. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed 100 PCT, tolerance
level residues and DEEM (ver. 7.81) default processing factors.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that flupyradifurone does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary assessment for
flupyradifurone. Tolerance level residues and 100 PCT were assumed for
all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for flupyradifurone in drinking water. These simulation
models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of flupyradifurone. 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/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS), Tier 1 Rice Model and Pesticide Root Zone Model
Ground Water (PRZM GW) model, the estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) of flupyradifurone for acute exposures are
estimated to be 112 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 352
ppb for ground water, and for chronic exposures are estimated to be 112
ppb for surface water and 307 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For the acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 352 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water. For the chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 307 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).
Currently there are no registered uses for flupyradifurone that
could result in residential exposures. However, there is a proposal to
register uses that could result in residential exposures for
application to ornamental plants (gardens, trees, shrubs, flowers).
Therefore, the EPA considered the proposed residential uses and
assessed residential exposure using the following assumptions: For
residential handlers, short-term dermal and inhalation exposures were
assessed for adults mixing, loading and applying liquids and ready to
use formulations to gardens and trees using a variety of application
equipment. For post-application exposure, short-term dermal exposures
to adults and children (6 to <11 years old) to gardens, trees, and
retail plants and indoor plants was evaluated. Only short-term
residential exposures are expected. 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 flupyradifurone to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and flupyradifurone does not appear
to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
flupyradifurone 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 is no evidence that
flupyradifurone produces increased susceptibility in in the rat
developmental study. There is quantitative increase in susceptibility
in the rabbit developmental and rat reproduction studies. In the rabbit
developmental study, no maternal effect was seen at the highest tested
dose (80 mg/kg/day), while there was an increase in fetal death and
decrease fetal body weight at the same dose level. In the rat
reproduction study, maternal effect, decrease in body weight, was seen
at 137 mg/kg/day, whereas decreases in pup body weight was seen at the
next lower dose, 38.7 mg/kg/day or above. However, the PODs selected
for risk assessment are protective of the quantitative susceptibility
seen in the rabbit fetuses and rat pups.
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 flupyradifurone is complete.
ii. Although there is evidence that flupyradifurone has neurotoxic
effects, EPA has a complete set of neurotoxicity studies (acute,
subchronic, and developmental). The effects of those studies are well-
characterized and indicate neurotoxic effects that occur at levels
above the chronic POD that was selected for risk assessment. The NOAEL
for the acute neurotoxicity study is being used for the acute POD.
Therefore, there is no need to retain the 10X FQPA SF to account for
any uncertainty concerning these effects.
iii. There is no evidence that flupyradifurone results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats. There is quantitative increase in
susceptibility in the rabbit developmental and rat reproduction
studies. However, the PODs selected for risk assessment are protective
of the quantitative susceptibility seen in the rabbit fetuses and rat
pups.
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
[[Page 65556]]
flupyradifurone in drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative
assumptions to assess the proposed residential post-application
exposure of children. These assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by flupyradifurone.
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 flupyradifurone will occupy 37% of the aPAD for children 1-2 years
old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
flupyradifurone from food and water will utilize 86% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
flupyradifurone 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). For
flupyradifurone there are uses pending which the Agency has included in
this action 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 flupyradifurone.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and proposed residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 170 for
adults and 190 for children (6 to <11 years old). Because EPA's level
of concern for flupyradifurone is a MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are
not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
flupyradifurone 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 flupyradifurone.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, flupyradifurone is not expected to pose a cancer risk to
humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to flupyradifurone residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An adequate analytical method (Method RV-001-P10-03) which uses
high-performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry
(HPLC/MS/MS) to quantitate residues of flupyradifurone and
difluoroacetic acid (DFA) in various crops is available for
enforcement.
The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established any MRLs for flupyradifurone.
C. Response to Comments
EPA received two comments to the Notice of Filing. The first
stated, in part, that EPA should deny this petition because it is a
harmful and toxic chemical. The Agency understands the commenter's
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. EPA has
assessed the effects of this chemical on human health and determined
that aggregate exposure to it will be safe. This citizen's comment
appears to be directed at the underlying statute and not EPA's
implementation of it; the citizen has made no contention that EPA has
acted in violation of the statutory framework.
The second comment was from Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR-4) and was in support of the petition.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
Bayer CropScience LP petitioned for tolerances on abiu, akee apple,
avocado, bacury, banana, binjai, canistel, cupuac[uacute], etambe,
jatob[aacute], kei apple, langstat, lanjut, lucuma, mabolo, mango,
mangosteen, paho, papaya, common pawpaw, pelipisan, pequi, pequia,
American persimmon, plantain, pomegranate, poshte, quandong, sapote,
sataw, screw-pine, star apple, tamarind-of-the-Indies, and wild loquat.
These commodities are all listed in the newly established crop subgroup
24B for tropical and subtropical, medium to large fruit, with a smooth,
inedible peel. Subgroup 24B further breaks out the different types of
avocado (to include Guatemalan, Mexican, and West Indian avocado),
mango (to include horse and Saipan mango), and sapote (to include
[[Page 65557]]
black, green, and white sapote). Although the petitioner did not
specify any particular kind of avocado, mango, and sapote, the Agency
considers the request for avocado, mango, and sapote to be general in
nature and include all varieties of those commodities. As a result, the
requested commodities align with the commodities contained in the new
subgroup 24B.
In the Federal Register of May 3, 2016 (81 FR 26471) (FRL-9944-87)
establishing that crop group, EPA indicated that, for existing
petitions for which a Notice of Filing had been published, the Agency
would attempt to conform these petitions to the rule. Therefore,
consistent with this rule, EPA is establishing tolerances on crop
subgroup 24B, the tropical and subtropical, medium to large fruit,
smooth, inedible peel subgroup, rather than all the commodities
individually. EPA's dietary and aggregate risk assessments are based on
data from the required representative commodities and account for
flupyradifurone exposure from all of the subgroup 24B commodities.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
flupyradifurone, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on
caneberry subgroup 13-07A at 5.0 ppm; cilantro, fresh leaves at 30 ppm;
fruit, stone, group 12-12 at 1.5 ppm; kava, fresh leaves at 40 ppm;
kava, roots at 0.90 ppm; quinoa, grain at 3.0 ppm; and the tropical and
subtropical, medium to large fruit, smooth, inedible peel subgroup 24B
at 0.60 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA 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: September 14, 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. 180.679, add alphabetically the commodities ``Caneberry
subgroup 13-07A''; ``Cilantro, fresh leaves''; ``Fruit, stone, group
12-12''; ``Kava, fresh leaves''; ``Kava, roots''; ``Quinoa, grain'';
and ``Tropical and subtropical, medium to large fruit, smooth, inedible
peel subgroup 24B'' to the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.679 Flupyradifurone; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Caneberry subgroup 13-07A............................... 5.0
* * * * *
Cilantro, fresh leaves.................................. 30
* * * * *
Fruit, stone, group 12-12............................... 1.5
* * * * *
Kava, fresh leaves...................................... 40
Kava, roots............................................. 0.90
* * * * *
Quinoa, grain........................................... 3.0
* * * * *
Tropical and subtropical, medium to large fruit, smooth, 0.60
inedible peel subgroup 24B.............................
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-22976 Filed 9-22-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P