Pyridaben; Pesticide Tolerances, 70974-70980 [2016-24089]
Download as PDF
70974
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 199 / Friday, October 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established in accordance with
FFDCA sections 408(e) and 408(l)(6),
such as the tolerances in this final rule,
do not require the issuance of a
proposed rule, the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers,
food processors, food handlers, and food
retailers, not States or tribes, nor does
this action alter the relationships or
distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress
in the preemption provisions of FFDCA
section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency
has determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on States
or tribal governments, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this action. In addition, this action
does not impose any enforceable duty or
contain any unfunded mandate as
described under Title II of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C.
1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VIII. Congressional Review Act
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:00 Oct 13, 2016
Jkt 241001
Dated: September 30, 2016.
Michael Goodis,
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 § 180.681, revise paragraph (b) to
read as follows:
■
§ 180.681
residues.
Isofetamid; tolerances for
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
Time-limited tolerances specified in the
following table are established for
residues of the fungicide, isofetamid (N[1,1-dimethyl-2-[2-methyl-4-(1methylethoxy)phenyl]-2-oxoethyl]-3methyl-2-thiophenecarboxamide) in or
on the specified agricultural
commodities, resulting from use of the
pesticide pursuant to FIFRA section 18
emergency exemptions. The tolerances
expire on the date specified in the table.
Parts per
million
Commodity
Caneberry subgroup 13–07A
Bushberry subgroup 13–07B
Expiration
date
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 HQ–EPA–OPP–2015–0390, 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
4.0
12/31/2019
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
5.0
12/31/2019
this action if you are an agricultural
*
*
*
*
*
producer, food manufacturer, or
[FR Doc. 2016–24932 Filed 10–13–16; 8:45 am]
pesticide manufacturer. The following
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
provides a guide to help readers
AGENCY
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
40 CFR Part 180
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2015–0390; FRL–9951–92]
• Animal production (NAICS code
Pyridaben; Pesticide Tolerances
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
311).
Agency (EPA).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
ACTION: Final rule.
code 32532).
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of the insecticide
pyridaben in or on multiple
commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document.
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4) requested these tolerances under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
October 14, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before December 13, 2016, and
must be filed in accordance with the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 199 / Friday, October 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 HQ–EPA–
OPP–2015–0390 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 December 13, 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 HQ–EPA–OPP–
2015–0390, 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 Wednesday,
August 26, 2015 (80 FR 51759) (FRL–
9931–74), EPA issued a document
pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing
of a pesticide petition (PP 5E8363) by
IR–4, IR–4 Project Headquarters,
Rutgers, The State University of New
Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201
W., Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.494 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the insecticide pyridaben,
[2-tert-butyl-5-(4-tert-butylbenzylthio)-4chloropyridazin-3(2H)-one] in or on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:00 Oct 13, 2016
Jkt 241001
berry, low growing subgroup 13–07G,
except cranberry at 2.5 ppm; cucumber
at 0.5 ppm; fruit, citrus group 10–10 at
0.5 ppm; fruit, pome group 11–10 at
0.75 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12–12 at
2.5 ppm; fruit, small, vine climbing,
subgroup 13–07F, except fuzzy kiwifruit
at 1.5 ppm; and nut, tree, group 14–12
at 0.05 ppm. In addition, the petitioner
requests removal of established
tolerances under 40 CFR 180.494 in or
on apple at 0.5 ppm; pear at 0.75 ppm;
nut, tree, group 14 at 0.05 ppm; citrus
(fruit) at 0.5 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12
at 2.5 ppm; pistachio at 0.05 ppm; grape
at 1.5 ppm; and strawberry at 2.5 ppm
upon approval of tolerances mentioned
above and thereby eliminating
redundancies. That document
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Gowan Company, the
registrant, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
Two comments were received on the
notice of filing in support of this action.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has revised
certain proposed tolerance levels,
corrected crops/crop group definitions,
as needed, and modified the tolerance
expression for pyridaben to comply
with current EPA policies. The reason
for these changes are explained in Unit
IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. . . .’’
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
70975
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for pyridaben
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with pyridaben follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity database 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.
In subchronic and chronic oral
toxicity studies in rats and mice, the
adverse effects were decreased body
weight and food consumption; in dogs,
toxicity consisted of increased
incidences of clinical signs (i.e.,
ptyalism) and decreased body weight. In
the repeat dose dermal toxicity studies
in rabbits, the adverse effect was
decreased body weight. In the repeat
dose inhalation toxicity study in rats,
there were no adverse effects up to the
highest dose tested. In all animals where
toxicity was observed, body weight
decreases became more pronounced as
study duration increased while
incidences of clinical signs of toxicity
did not become more severe or more
frequent as the study duration
increased.
Susceptibility was observed in the rat
prenatal developmental toxicity and rat
developmental neurotoxicity studies. In
the rat prenatal developmental toxicity
study, fetal toxicity (i.e., decreased
bodyweight and incomplete
ossification) occurred in the absence of
maternal toxicity at the highest dose
tested (HDT) of 30 mg/kg/day. In the rat
developmental neurotoxicity study,
offspring toxicity (i.e., decreased
bodyweight) occurred in the absence of
maternal toxicity at the HDT of 8.4 mg/
kg/day. In the rabbit prenatal
developmental toxicity study, fetal and
maternal toxicity consisted of abortions
and occurred at the HDT of 15 mg/kg/
day. There were no adverse effects
observed in the rabbit dermal prenatal
developmental toxicity study. In the rat
reproduction and fertility effects study,
parental and offspring toxicity (i.e.,
decreased bodyweight) occurred at the
HDT of 6.3 mg/kg/day.
In the acute neurotoxicity study in
rats, animals had increased incidences
of clinical signs (i.e., piloerection,
hypoactivity, tremors, and partially
closed eyes). In the subchronic
neurotoxicity study in rats, male
animals had increased incidences of
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
70976
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 199 / Friday, October 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
impaired righting reflex. In the
developmental neurotoxicity study in
rats, there were no neurotoxicity effects
up to the highest dose tested (17.7 mg/
kg/day).
Pyridaben has been classified as ‘‘not
likely to be carcinogenic in humans’’
based on the results from
carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice.
The mutagenicity studies do not
indicate increased mutagenic potential
in the battery of in vivo and in vitro
assays.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by pyridaben as well as
the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document
‘‘Pyridaben—Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Uses on
Greenhouse Cucumbers and Crop Group
Expansions for Pome Fruit Group 11–
10, Tree Nut Group 14–12, Stone Fruit
Group 12–12, Citrus Fruit Group 10–10,
Small Fruit Vine Climbing (except
Fuzzy Kiwifruit) Subgroup 13–07F, and
Low Growing Berry Subgroup 13–07G
(except Cranberry), dated June 21, 2016’’
at page 28 in docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPP–2015–0390.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which no adverse effects are
observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/assessinghuman-health-risk-pesticides.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for pyridaben used for human
risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of
this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR PYRIDABEN 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 dietary (General population including infants and children).
NOAEL = 44 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Acute RfD = 0.44 mg/kg/
day.
aPAD = 0.44] mg/kg/day
Chronic dietary (All populations) .........
NOAEL= 2.2 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Chronic RfD = 0.022
mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.022 mg/kg/
day
Acute Neurotoxicity Study in Rats:
LOAEL = 80 mg/kg/day based on increased
incidences of clinical signs (i.e., piloerection,
hypoactivity, tremors, and partially closed
eyes).
Reproduction and Fertility Effects in Rats LOAEL
= 6.3 mg/kg/day based on decreased parental
and pup body weight.
Cancer (Oral, dermal, and inhalation)
Classification: ‘‘Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’ based on the results of carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice.
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).
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to pyridaben, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing
pyridaben tolerances in 40 CFR 180.494.
EPA assessed dietary exposures from
pyridaben 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
pyridaben. In estimating acute dietary
exposure, EPA used the Dietary
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:00 Oct 13, 2016
Jkt 241001
Exposure Evaluation Model-Food
Commodity Intake Database (DEEM–
FCIDTM), Version 3.16, which
incorporates 2003–2008 food
consumption information from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s)
National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA used
anticipated-residue estimates derived
from proposed and established tolerance
levels; DEEM–FCIDTM, Version 7.81
default processing factors were utilized
for most processed commodities; and
100 percent crop treated (PCT).
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the DEEM–FCIDTM, Version
3.16, which incorporates 2003–2008
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
food consumption data from the USDA’s
NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels
in food, the chronic dietary exposure
assessment is partially refined,
assuming anticipated residue estimates
derived from proposed and established
tolerance levels and percent crop treated
estimates for most crops.
iii. Cancer. Pyridaben has been
classified as not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans. Based on the
data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that pyridaben does not pose
a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a
dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. Section
408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 199 / Friday, October 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
to use available data and information on
the anticipated residue levels of
pesticide residues in food and the actual
levels of pesticide residues that have
been measured in food. If EPA relies on
such information, EPA must require
pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1)
that data be provided 5 years after the
tolerance is established, modified, or
left in effect, demonstrating that the
levels in food are not above the levels
anticipated. For the present action, EPA
will issue such data call-ins as are
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E)
and authorized under FFDCA section
408(f)(1). Data will be required to be
submitted no later than 5 years from the
date of issuance of these tolerances.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states
that the Agency may use data on the
actual percent of food treated for
assessing chronic dietary risk only if:
• Condition a: The data used are
reliable and provide a valid basis to
show what percentage of the food
derived from such crop is likely to
contain the pesticide residue.
• Condition b: The exposure estimate
does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group.
• Condition c: Data are available on
pesticide use and food consumption in
a particular area, the exposure estimate
does not understate exposure for the
population in such area. In addition, the
Agency must provide for periodic
evaluation of any estimates used. To
provide for the periodic evaluation of
the estimate of PCT as required by
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may
require registrants to submit data on
PCT.
The Agency estimated the PCT for
chronic exposure for existing uses as
follows: almonds 2.5%; apples 20%;
cherries 2.5%; grapefruit 35%; grapes
5%; lemons 2.5%; nectarines 2.5%;
oranges 10%; peaches 10%; pears 35%;
pecans 2.5%; plums/prunes 5%;
tangelos 15%; tangerines 25%; tomatoes
2.5%; and walnuts 5%.
In most cases, EPA uses available data
from United States Department of
Agriculture/National Agricultural
Statistics Service (USDA/NASS),
proprietary market surveys, and the
National Pesticide Use Database for the
chemical/crop combination for the most
recent 6–7 years. EPA uses an average
PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis.
The average PCT figure for each existing
use is derived by combining available
public and private market survey data
for that use, averaging across all
observations, and rounding to the
nearest 5%, except for those situations
in which the average PCT is less than
one. In those cases, 1% is used as the
average PCT and 2.5% is used as the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:00 Oct 13, 2016
Jkt 241001
maximum PCT. EPA uses a maximum
PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the highest
observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available
public and private market survey data
for the existing use and rounded up to
the nearest multiple of 5%.
The Agency believes that the three
conditions discussed in Unit III.C.1.iv.
have been met. With respect to
Condition a, PCT estimates are derived
from Federal and private market survey
data, which are reliable and have a valid
basis. The Agency is reasonably certain
that the percentage of the food treated
is not likely to be an underestimation.
As to Conditions b and c, regional
consumption information and
consumption information for significant
subpopulations is taken into account
through EPA’s computer-based model
for evaluating the exposure of
significant subpopulations including
several regional groups. Use of this
consumption information in EPA’s risk
assessment process ensures that EPA’s
exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant
subpopulation group and allows the
Agency to be reasonably certain that no
regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those
estimated by the Agency. Other than the
data available through national food
consumption surveys, EPA does not
have available reliable information on
the regional consumption of food to
which pyridaben may be applied in a
particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for pyridaben in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of pyridaben.
Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at:
https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-scienceand-assessing-pesticide-risks/aboutwater-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
The EPA’s Tier II water models have
been updated and applied in the
drinking water analysis for total
residues of concern (TRC) of pyridaben.
The Pesticide Water Calculator (PWC),
Ver.1.5001, has replaced the PE5 shell
for the Pesticide Root Zone Model/
Exposure Analysis Modeling System
(PRZM/EXAMS) used previously to
generate surface water estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWC)
in dietary risk assessments. In addition,
the PRZM-Ground Water (PRZM GW)
model, version 1.07, has replaced
Screening Concentration in Ground
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
70977
Water (SCI–GROW), which was used to
generate groundwater EDWCs. These
latest versions of the PWC and PRZM–
GW models not only analyze for
pyridaben, but its two degradates PB–7
and P–9, residues of concern for
drinking water.
Based on the PWC and PRZM GW, the
maximum acute surface water EDWCs of
pyridaben TRC for acute exposures are
estimated to be 12 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and an
indeterminately low concentration for
ground water.
For chronic exposures for non-cancer
assessments are estimated to be 0.91
ppb for surface water and an
indeterminately low concentration for
ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model.
For acute dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration value of 12 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water.
For chronic dietary risk assessment,
the water concentration of value 0.91
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). Pyridaben
is not registered for any specific use
patterns that would result in residential
exposure.
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at: https://www2.epa.gov/
pesticide-science-and-assessingpesticide-risks/standard-operatingprocedures-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 pyridaben to share
a common mechanism of toxicity with
any other substances, and pyridaben
does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that pyridaben does not have
a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
70978
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 199 / Friday, October 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There was no evidence for increased
susceptibility to pyridaben following
pre- or post-natal exposure in the rat
reproduction and fertility effects study,
notwithstanding the observed decreased
pup body weight since that is not
considered to be more severe than
decreased parental body weight.
Parental and offspring toxicity (i.e.,
decreased bodyweight) occurred at the
HDT of 6.3 mg/kg/day.
Increased susceptibility following
prenatal exposure in the rat prenatal
developmental toxicity studies was
observed including fetal toxicity (i.e.,
decreased bodyweight and incomplete
ossification) occurring in the absence of
maternal toxicity at the HDT of 30 mg/
kg/day. In the rabbit prenatal
developmental toxicity study, fetal and
maternal toxicity consisted of abortions
and occurred at the HDT of 15 mg/kg/
day. There were no adverse effects
observed in the rabbit dermal prenatal
developmental toxicity study.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for pyridaben
is complete.
ii. Although there are signs that
pyridaben causes neurotoxic effects, a
developmental neurotoxicity study in
rats demonstrated no observed
neurotoxicity effects in offspring up to
the HDT of 17.7 mg/kg/day.
Furthermore, the RfD of 0.44 mg/kg/day
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:00 Oct 13, 2016
Jkt 241001
for acute dietary exposures is protective
of the HTD in the developmental
neurotoxicity study. Additionally, the
acute RfD is based on clinical signs
(piloerection, hypoactivity, tremors and
partially closed eyes) in adults that
could be signs of neurotoxicity, however
tissue analysis did not confirm
neurotoxicity. Similarly, the chronic
RfD of 0.022 mg/kg/day (based on
parental and pup body weight decreases
in a reproductive study) is protective of
the impaired righting reflex observed in
the subchronic neurotoxicity study at
8.5 mg/kg/day. There is no need to
retain the FQPA 10X to account for any
residual uncertainties concerning
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is evidence that pyridaben
results in increased susceptibility
following prenatal exposure in the rat
prenatal developmental toxicity and rat
developmental neurotoxicity studies.
There was no evidence for increased
susceptibility following pre- or postnatal exposure in the rat reproduction
and fertility effects study since the
decreased pup body weight is not
considered to be more severe than
decreased parental body weight. EPA
concluded that selected endpoints based
on the rat reproduction and fertility
effects study’s NOAELs/LOAELs are
protective of the susceptibility observed
in the rat prenatal developmental
toxicity and rat developmental
neurotoxicity studies.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The pyridaben exposure databases are
complete or are estimated based on data
that reasonably account for potential
exposures. The chronic dietary food
exposure assessment was based on
anticipated residue estimates derived
from proposed and established tolerance
levels and PCT assumptions and
conservative ground water drinking
water modeling estimates. All of the
exposure estimates are not likely to
result in underestimated exposure and
risks posed by pyridaben.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this unit for
acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to
pyridaben will occupy 7.8% of the
aPAD for the general U.S. population
and 29% 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 pyridaben from
food and water will utilize 5% of the
cPAD for the general U.S. Population
and 20% of the cPAD for children 1–2
years old, the population group
receiving the greatest exposure. There
are no residential uses for pyridaben.
3. Short-term and Intermediate-term
risks. Short-term and intermediate-term
aggregate exposures take into account
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Pyridaben is not registered for use on
any sites that would result in residential
exposure. Therefore, the aggregate risk
is the sum of the risk from food and
water, which do not exceed the
Agency’s level of concern.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
pyridaben 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 pyridaben
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(gas chromatography with mass
spectrometry (GC/MS) detection using a
modified version of BASF Method
D9312A) is available to enforce the
tolerance expression.
The method may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;
telephone number: (410) 305–2905;
email address: residuemethods@
epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 199 / Friday, October 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
There are no Codex maximum residue
levels (MRLs) established for residues of
pyridaben on the commodities for
which tolerances are being established
in this action.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
In order to harmonize tolerances with
Canada and avoid trade irritants, EPA is
establishing pyridaben tolerances as
follows: (1) Fruit, stone, group 12–12 at
3.0 ppm, instead of at 2.5 ppm as
requested; (2) Fruit, citrus, group 10–10
at 0.9 ppm, instead of at 0.5 ppm as
requested; and (3) Fruit, small, vine
climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit
subgroup 13–07F at 2.0 ppm, instead of
at 1.5 ppm, as requested.
Finally, in accordance with EPA’s
policy to update its tolerance
expressions where applicable, EPA is
revising the tolerance expression to
clarify that (1) as provided in FFDCA
section 408(a)(3), the tolerance covers
metabolites and degradates of pyridaben
not specifically mentioned; and (2)
compliance with the specified tolerance
levels is to be determined by measuring
only the specific compounds mentioned
in the tolerance expression.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of the insecticide
pyridaben, [2-tert-butyl-5-(4-tertbutylbenzylthio)-4-chloropyridazin3(2H)-one] in or on berry, low growing
subgroup 13–07G, except cranberry at
2.5 ppm; cucumber at 0.50 ppm; fruit,
citrus group 10–10 at 0.9 ppm; fruit,
pome group 11–10 at 0.75 ppm; fruit,
stone, group 12–12 at 3.0 ppm; fruit,
small, vine climbing except fuzzy
kiwifruit subgroup 13–07F at 2.0 ppm;
and nut, tree, group 14–12 at 0.05 ppm.
Additionally, the existing tolerances in
or on apple at 0.50 ppm; pear at 0.75
ppm; nut, tree, group 14 at 0.05 ppm;
fruit, stone, group 12 at 2.5 ppm; citrus
at 0.5 ppm; pistachio at 0.05 ppm; grape
at 1.5 ppm; and strawberry at 2.5 ppm
are being removed as a result of being
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:00 Oct 13, 2016
Jkt 241001
superseded by the new tolerances. Also,
the tolerance expression is being
updated to clarify that the tolerance
covers metabolites and degradates of
pyridaben not specifically mentioned
and compliance with the specified
tolerance levels is to be determined by
measuring only the specific compounds
mentioned in the tolerance expression.
Finally in order to correct a
typographical error that was made in a
previous action (Federal Register of
July, 14, 2000 (65 FR 43704) (FRL–
6593–1)), where a number was
inadvertently dropped from the table in
paragraph (a), the EPA is revising the
goat fat tolerance from 0.0 ppm to 0.05
ppm in order to reinstate the original
tolerance level published in the Federal
Register of May 16, 1997 (62 FR 26954)
(FRL–5178–4).
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
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
70979
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 9, 2016.
Michael L. Goodis,
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. Section 180.494 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as
follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
70980
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 199 / Friday, October 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
§ 180.494 Pyridaben; tolerance for
residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of the
insecticide pyridaben, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities as indicated in the
following table. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified below for
plant commodities is to be determined
by measuring the insecticide pyridaben
[2-tert-butyl-5-(4-tert-butylbenzylthio)-4chloropyridazin-3(2H)-one] on the plant
commodity. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified below for
animal commodities is to be determined
by measuring the insecticide pyridaben
and its metabolites, [2-tert-butyl-5-(4-(1carboxy-1-methylethy 1) benzylthio)-4chloropyridazin-3 (2H)one] and [2-tertbutyl-5-[4(-1, l-dimethyl-2hydroxyethyl)benzylthio-4chloropyridazin-3(2H)one] on the
animal commodity.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Commodity
Parts per
million
Almond, hulls ........................
Apple, wet pomace ...............
Berry, low growing, subgroup
13–07G, except cranberry
Canistel .................................
Cattle, fat ..............................
Cattle, meat ..........................
Cattle, meat byproducts .......
Citrus, dried pulp ..................
Citrus, oil ...............................
Cucumber .............................
Fruit, citrus group 10–10 ......
Fruit, pome group 11–10 ......
Fruit, small, vine climbing,
except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F ....................
Fruit, stone, group 12–12 .....
Goat, fat ................................
Goat, meat ............................
Goat, meat byproducts .........
Hog, fat .................................
Hog, meat .............................
Hog, meat byproducts ..........
Hop, dried cones ..................
Horse, fat ..............................
Horse, meat ..........................
Horse, meat byproducts .......
Mango ...................................
Milk .......................................
Nut, tree, group 14–12 .........
Papaya ..................................
Sapodilla ...............................
Sapote, black ........................
Sapote, mamey ....................
Sheep, fat .............................
Sheep, meat .........................
Sheep, meat byproducts ......
Star apple .............................
Tomato ..................................
4.0
0.75
2.5
0.10
0.05
0.05
0.05
1.5
10.0
0.50
0.9
0.75
2.0
3.0
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
10.0
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.10
0.01
0.05
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.10
0.15
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. Tolerances with regional
registration, as defined in § 180.1(m) are
established for residues of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:00 Oct 13, 2016
Jkt 241001
insecticide pyridaben, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by
measuring the insecticide pyridaben [2tert-butyl-5-(4-tert-butylbenzylthio)-4chloropyridazin-3(2H)-one] on the
following plant commodity.
Parts per
million
Commodity
1. On page 3728, second column, first
partial paragraph, line 12, the phrase
‘‘FY 2004 using actual market basket’’ is
corrected to read ‘‘FY 2002 using actual
market basket’’.
Dated: October 6, 2016.
Wilma Robinson,
Deputy Executive Secretary to the
Department, Department of Health and
Human Services.
[FR Doc. 2016–24917 Filed 10–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
Cranberry ..............................
*
*
*
*
0.5
*
[FR Doc. 2016–24089 Filed 10–13–16; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
49 CFR Part 190
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
42 CFR Part 412
[Docket No. PHMSA–2016–0091; Amdt. No.
190–18]
RIN 2137–AF26
[CMS–1659–CN]
Pipeline Safety: Enhanced Emergency
Order Procedures
RIN 0938–ZB26
AGENCY:
Medicare Program; Explanation of FY
2004 Outlier Fixed-Loss Threshold as
Required by Court Rulings; Correction
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Clarification; correction.
AGENCY:
This document corrects a
technical error that appeared in the
document published in the Federal
Register on January 22, 2016 entitled
‘‘Medicare Program; Explanation of FY
2004 Outlier Fixed-Loss Threshold as
Required by Court Rulings.’’
DATES: October 14, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don
Thompson, (410) 786–6504.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Background
In FR Doc. 2016–01309 of January 22,
2016 (81 FR 3727), there was an error
that is identified and corrected in the
Correction of Errors section below. The
provisions of this correction document
are applicable as if they had been
included in the document published
January 22, 2016.
II. Summary of Errors
On page 3728, in our discussion of the
cost-to-charge ratios estimates, we made
an error regarding the fiscal year (FY).
III. Correction of Errors
In FR Doc. 2016–01309 of January 22,
2016 (81 FR 3727), make the following
correction:
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), Department of Transportation
(DOT).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
This interim final rule (IFR)
establishes regulations implementing
the emergency order authority conferred
on the Secretary of Transportation
(Secretary) by the ‘‘Protecting our
Infrastructure of Pipelines and
Enhancing Safety Act of 2016’’ (PIPES
Act). These regulations are mandated by
the PIPES Act and, in accordance with
the Act, PHMSA is establishing
procedures for the issuance of
emergency orders that will be used to
address an unsafe condition or practice,
or combination of unsafe conditions or
practices, that pose an imminent hazard
to public health and safety or the
environment. By implementing this
statutory mandate, PHMSA will
enhance its existing enforcement
authority to respond immediately to
conditions or practices that exist in a
subset of, or across, the pipeline
industry. This IFR solely affects agency
enforcement procedures to implement
the emergency order provisions of the
law and; therefore, this rulemaking
results in no additional burden or
compliance costs to industry. PHMSA is
issuing this IFR because the PIPES Act
directs PHMSA to first issue temporary
regulations. However, the agency invites
comments and will, if appropriate, make
changes to the IFR prior to the issuance
of a final rule, which the agency must
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\14OCR1.SGM
14OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 199 (Friday, October 14, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70974-70980]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24089]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0390; FRL-9951-92]
Pyridaben; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of the
insecticide pyridaben in or on multiple commodities which are
identified and discussed later in this document. Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these tolerances under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective October 14, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before December 13, 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 HQ-EPA-OPP-2015-0390, 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
[[Page 70975]]
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 HQ-EPA-OPP-2015-0390 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
December 13, 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 HQ-EPA-OPP-2015-0390, 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 Wednesday, August 26, 2015 (80 FR 51759)
(FRL-9931-74), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section
408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide
petition (PP 5E8363) by IR-4, IR-4 Project Headquarters, Rutgers, The
State University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201 W.,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.494 be
amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide
pyridaben, [2-tert-butyl-5-(4-tert-butylbenzylthio)-4-chloropyridazin-
3(2H)-one] in or on berry, low growing subgroup 13-07G, except
cranberry at 2.5 ppm; cucumber at 0.5 ppm; fruit, citrus group 10-10 at
0.5 ppm; fruit, pome group 11-10 at 0.75 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12-12
at 2.5 ppm; fruit, small, vine climbing, subgroup 13-07F, except fuzzy
kiwifruit at 1.5 ppm; and nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.05 ppm. In
addition, the petitioner requests removal of established tolerances
under 40 CFR 180.494 in or on apple at 0.5 ppm; pear at 0.75 ppm; nut,
tree, group 14 at 0.05 ppm; citrus (fruit) at 0.5 ppm; fruit, stone,
group 12 at 2.5 ppm; pistachio at 0.05 ppm; grape at 1.5 ppm; and
strawberry at 2.5 ppm upon approval of tolerances mentioned above and
thereby eliminating redundancies. That document referenced a summary of
the petition prepared by Gowan Company, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. Two comments were
received on the notice of filing in support of this action.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
revised certain proposed tolerance levels, corrected crops/crop group
definitions, as needed, and modified the tolerance expression for
pyridaben to comply with current EPA policies. The reason for these
changes are explained in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for pyridaben including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with pyridaben follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity database 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.
In subchronic and chronic oral toxicity studies in rats and mice,
the adverse effects were decreased body weight and food consumption; in
dogs, toxicity consisted of increased incidences of clinical signs
(i.e., ptyalism) and decreased body weight. In the repeat dose dermal
toxicity studies in rabbits, the adverse effect was decreased body
weight. In the repeat dose inhalation toxicity study in rats, there
were no adverse effects up to the highest dose tested. In all animals
where toxicity was observed, body weight decreases became more
pronounced as study duration increased while incidences of clinical
signs of toxicity did not become more severe or more frequent as the
study duration increased.
Susceptibility was observed in the rat prenatal developmental
toxicity and rat developmental neurotoxicity studies. In the rat
prenatal developmental toxicity study, fetal toxicity (i.e., decreased
bodyweight and incomplete ossification) occurred in the absence of
maternal toxicity at the highest dose tested (HDT) of 30 mg/kg/day. In
the rat developmental neurotoxicity study, offspring toxicity (i.e.,
decreased bodyweight) occurred in the absence of maternal toxicity at
the HDT of 8.4 mg/kg/day. In the rabbit prenatal developmental toxicity
study, fetal and maternal toxicity consisted of abortions and occurred
at the HDT of 15 mg/kg/day. There were no adverse effects observed in
the rabbit dermal prenatal developmental toxicity study. In the rat
reproduction and fertility effects study, parental and offspring
toxicity (i.e., decreased bodyweight) occurred at the HDT of 6.3 mg/kg/
day.
In the acute neurotoxicity study in rats, animals had increased
incidences of clinical signs (i.e., piloerection, hypoactivity,
tremors, and partially closed eyes). In the subchronic neurotoxicity
study in rats, male animals had increased incidences of
[[Page 70976]]
impaired righting reflex. In the developmental neurotoxicity study in
rats, there were no neurotoxicity effects up to the highest dose tested
(17.7 mg/kg/day).
Pyridaben has been classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic in
humans'' based on the results from carcinogenicity studies in rats and
mice. The mutagenicity studies do not indicate increased mutagenic
potential in the battery of in vivo and in vitro assays.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by pyridaben as well as the no-observed-adverse-
effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level
(LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document ``Pyridaben--Human Health Risk
Assessment for Proposed Uses on Greenhouse Cucumbers and Crop Group
Expansions for Pome Fruit Group 11-10, Tree Nut Group 14-12, Stone
Fruit Group 12-12, Citrus Fruit Group 10-10, Small Fruit Vine Climbing
(except Fuzzy Kiwifruit) Subgroup 13-07F, and Low Growing Berry
Subgroup 13-07G (except Cranberry), dated June 21, 2016'' at page 28 in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0390.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for pyridaben used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for pyridaben for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure and
Exposure/Scenario uncertainty/safety RfD, PAD, LOC for risk Study and toxicological
factors assessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (General population NOAEL = 44 mg/kg/day.. Acute RfD = 0.44 mg/kg/ Acute Neurotoxicity Study
including infants and children). UFA = 10x............. day. in Rats:
UFH = 10x............. aPAD = 0.44] mg/kg/day LOAEL = 80 mg/kg/day based
FQPA SF = 1x.......... on increased incidences of
clinical signs (i.e.,
piloerection,
hypoactivity, tremors, and
partially closed eyes).
Chronic dietary (All populations).. NOAEL= 2.2 mg/kg/day.. Chronic RfD = 0.022 mg/ Reproduction and Fertility
UFA = 10x............. kg/day. Effects in Rats LOAEL =
UFH = 10x............. cPAD = 0.022 mg/kg/day 6.3 mg/kg/day based on
FQPA SF = 1x.......... decreased parental and pup
body weight.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, and Classification: ``Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans'' based on the
inhalation). results of carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 pyridaben, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing pyridaben tolerances in 40 CFR
180.494. EPA assessed dietary exposures from pyridaben 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 pyridaben. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model-Food
Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCIDTM), Version 3.16, which
incorporates 2003-2008 food consumption information from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA used anticipated-residue estimates derived
from proposed and established tolerance levels; DEEM-FCIDTM,
Version 7.81 default processing factors were utilized for most
processed commodities; and 100 percent crop treated (PCT).
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the DEEM-FCIDTM, Version 3.16, which
incorporates 2003-2008 food consumption data from the USDA's NHANES/
WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, the chronic dietary exposure
assessment is partially refined, assuming anticipated residue estimates
derived from proposed and established tolerance levels and percent crop
treated estimates for most crops.
iii. Cancer. Pyridaben has been classified as not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A.,
EPA has concluded that pyridaben does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA
[[Page 70977]]
to use available data and information on the anticipated residue levels
of pesticide residues in food and the actual levels of pesticide
residues that have been measured in food. If EPA relies on such
information, EPA must require pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) that
data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is established, modified,
or left in effect, demonstrating that the levels in food are not above
the levels anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such
data call-ins as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and
authorized under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to be
submitted no later than 5 years from the date of issuance of these
tolerances.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary
risk only if:
Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a
valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop
is likely to contain the pesticide residue.
Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
Condition c: Data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area. In addition, the
Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any estimates used. To
provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate of PCT as required
by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require registrants to submit
data on PCT.
The Agency estimated the PCT for chronic exposure for existing uses
as follows: almonds 2.5%; apples 20%; cherries 2.5%; grapefruit 35%;
grapes 5%; lemons 2.5%; nectarines 2.5%; oranges 10%; peaches 10%;
pears 35%; pecans 2.5%; plums/prunes 5%; tangelos 15%; tangerines 25%;
tomatoes 2.5%; and walnuts 5%.
In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States
Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service
(USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and the National Pesticide Use
Database for the chemical/crop combination for the most recent 6-7
years. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis. The
average PCT figure for each existing use is derived by combining
available public and private market survey data for that use, averaging
across all observations, and rounding to the nearest 5%, except for
those situations in which the average PCT is less than one. In those
cases, 1% is used as the average PCT and 2.5% is used as the maximum
PCT. EPA uses a maximum PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the highest observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available public and private market survey
data for the existing use and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%.
The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed in Unit
III.C.1.iv. have been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates
are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are
reliable and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that
the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an
underestimation. As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption
information and consumption information for significant subpopulations
is taken into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating
the exposure of significant subpopulations including several regional
groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment
process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency
to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than
the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does
not have available reliable information on the regional consumption of
food to which pyridaben may be applied in a particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for pyridaben in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of pyridaben. 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.
The EPA's Tier II water models have been updated and applied in the
drinking water analysis for total residues of concern (TRC) of
pyridaben. The Pesticide Water Calculator (PWC), Ver.1.5001, has
replaced the PE5 shell for the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure
Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS) used previously to generate
surface water estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWC) in dietary
risk assessments. In addition, the PRZM-Ground Water (PRZM GW) model,
version 1.07, has replaced Screening Concentration in Ground Water
(SCI-GROW), which was used to generate groundwater EDWCs. These latest
versions of the PWC and PRZM-GW models not only analyze for pyridaben,
but its two degradates PB-7 and P-9, residues of concern for drinking
water.
Based on the PWC and PRZM GW, the maximum acute surface water EDWCs
of pyridaben TRC for acute exposures are estimated to be 12 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and an indeterminately low
concentration for ground water.
For chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to
be 0.91 ppb for surface water and an indeterminately low concentration
for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model.
For acute dietary risk assessment, the water concentration value of
12 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.
For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration of
value 0.91 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). Pyridaben is not
registered for any specific use patterns that would result in
residential exposure.
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 pyridaben to share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and pyridaben does not appear to produce a
toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that pyridaben does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA's efforts to determine
[[Page 70978]]
which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at: https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There was no evidence for
increased susceptibility to pyridaben following pre- or post-natal
exposure in the rat reproduction and fertility effects study,
notwithstanding the observed decreased pup body weight since that is
not considered to be more severe than decreased parental body weight.
Parental and offspring toxicity (i.e., decreased bodyweight) occurred
at the HDT of 6.3 mg/kg/day.
Increased susceptibility following prenatal exposure in the rat
prenatal developmental toxicity studies was observed including fetal
toxicity (i.e., decreased bodyweight and incomplete ossification)
occurring in the absence of maternal toxicity at the HDT of 30 mg/kg/
day. In the rabbit prenatal developmental toxicity study, fetal and
maternal toxicity consisted of abortions and occurred at the HDT of 15
mg/kg/day. There were no adverse effects observed in the rabbit dermal
prenatal developmental toxicity study.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for pyridaben is complete.
ii. Although there are signs that pyridaben causes neurotoxic
effects, a developmental neurotoxicity study in rats demonstrated no
observed neurotoxicity effects in offspring up to the HDT of 17.7 mg/
kg/day. Furthermore, the RfD of 0.44 mg/kg/day for acute dietary
exposures is protective of the HTD in the developmental neurotoxicity
study. Additionally, the acute RfD is based on clinical signs
(piloerection, hypoactivity, tremors and partially closed eyes) in
adults that could be signs of neurotoxicity, however tissue analysis
did not confirm neurotoxicity. Similarly, the chronic RfD of 0.022 mg/
kg/day (based on parental and pup body weight decreases in a
reproductive study) is protective of the impaired righting reflex
observed in the subchronic neurotoxicity study at 8.5 mg/kg/day. There
is no need to retain the FQPA 10X to account for any residual
uncertainties concerning neurotoxicity.
iii. There is evidence that pyridaben results in increased
susceptibility following prenatal exposure in the rat prenatal
developmental toxicity and rat developmental neurotoxicity studies.
There was no evidence for increased susceptibility following pre- or
post-natal exposure in the rat reproduction and fertility effects study
since the decreased pup body weight is not considered to be more severe
than decreased parental body weight. EPA concluded that selected
endpoints based on the rat reproduction and fertility effects study's
NOAELs/LOAELs are protective of the susceptibility observed in the rat
prenatal developmental toxicity and rat developmental neurotoxicity
studies.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The pyridaben exposure databases are complete or are
estimated based on data that reasonably account for potential
exposures. The chronic dietary food exposure assessment was based on
anticipated residue estimates derived from proposed and established
tolerance levels and PCT assumptions and conservative ground water
drinking water modeling estimates. All of the exposure estimates are
not likely to result in underestimated exposure and risks posed by
pyridaben.
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 pyridaben will occupy 7.8% of the aPAD for the general U.S.
population and 29% 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
pyridaben from food and water will utilize 5% of the cPAD for the
general U.S. Population and 20% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old,
the population group receiving the greatest exposure. There are no
residential uses for pyridaben.
3. Short-term and Intermediate-term risks. Short-term and
intermediate-term aggregate exposures take into account residential
exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a
background exposure level). Pyridaben is not registered for use on any
sites that would result in residential exposure. Therefore, the
aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from food and water, which do not
exceed the Agency's level of concern.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, pyridaben 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 pyridaben residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (gas chromatography with mass
spectrometry (GC/MS) detection using a modified version of BASF Method
D9312A) is available to enforce the tolerance expression.
The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the
[[Page 70979]]
international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section
408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food and
Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards
program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
There are no Codex maximum residue levels (MRLs) established for
residues of pyridaben on the commodities for which tolerances are being
established in this action.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
In order to harmonize tolerances with Canada and avoid trade
irritants, EPA is establishing pyridaben tolerances as follows: (1)
Fruit, stone, group 12-12 at 3.0 ppm, instead of at 2.5 ppm as
requested; (2) Fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 0.9 ppm, instead of at 0.5
ppm as requested; and (3) Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy
kiwifruit subgroup 13-07F at 2.0 ppm, instead of at 1.5 ppm, as
requested.
Finally, in accordance with EPA's policy to update its tolerance
expressions where applicable, EPA is revising the tolerance expression
to clarify that (1) as provided in FFDCA section 408(a)(3), the
tolerance covers metabolites and degradates of pyridaben not
specifically mentioned; and (2) compliance with the specified tolerance
levels is to be determined by measuring only the specific compounds
mentioned in the tolerance expression.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of the
insecticide pyridaben, [2-tert-butyl-5-(4-tert-butylbenzylthio)-4-
chloropyridazin-3(2H)-one] in or on berry, low growing subgroup 13-07G,
except cranberry at 2.5 ppm; cucumber at 0.50 ppm; fruit, citrus group
10-10 at 0.9 ppm; fruit, pome group 11-10 at 0.75 ppm; fruit, stone,
group 12-12 at 3.0 ppm; fruit, small, vine climbing except fuzzy
kiwifruit subgroup 13-07F at 2.0 ppm; and nut, tree, group 14-12 at
0.05 ppm. Additionally, the existing tolerances in or on apple at 0.50
ppm; pear at 0.75 ppm; nut, tree, group 14 at 0.05 ppm; fruit, stone,
group 12 at 2.5 ppm; citrus at 0.5 ppm; pistachio at 0.05 ppm; grape at
1.5 ppm; and strawberry at 2.5 ppm are being removed as a result of
being superseded by the new tolerances. Also, the tolerance expression
is being updated to clarify that the tolerance covers metabolites and
degradates of pyridaben not specifically mentioned and compliance with
the specified tolerance levels is to be determined by measuring only
the specific compounds mentioned in the tolerance expression. Finally
in order to correct a typographical error that was made in a previous
action (Federal Register of July, 14, 2000 (65 FR 43704) (FRL-6593-1)),
where a number was inadvertently dropped from the table in paragraph
(a), the EPA is revising the goat fat tolerance from 0.0 ppm to 0.05
ppm in order to reinstate the original tolerance level published in the
Federal Register of May 16, 1997 (62 FR 26954) (FRL-5178-4).
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 9, 2016.
Michael L. Goodis,
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. Section 180.494 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (c) to
read as follows:
[[Page 70980]]
Sec. 180.494 Pyridaben; tolerance for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
insecticide pyridaben, including its metabolites and degradates, in or
on the commodities as indicated in the following table. Compliance with
the tolerance levels specified below for plant commodities is to be
determined by measuring the insecticide pyridaben [2-tert-butyl-5-(4-
tert-butylbenzylthio)-4-chloropyridazin-3(2H)-one] on the plant
commodity. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below for
animal commodities is to be determined by measuring the insecticide
pyridaben and its metabolites, [2-tert-butyl-5-(4-(1-carboxy-1-
methylethy 1) benzylthio)-4-chloropyridazin-3 (2H)one] and [2-tert-
butyl-5-[4(-1, l-dimethyl-2-hydroxyethyl)benzylthio-4-chloropyridazin-
3(2H)one] on the animal commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almond, hulls........................................... 4.0
Apple, wet pomace....................................... 0.75
Berry, low growing, subgroup 13-07G, except cranberry... 2.5
Canistel................................................ 0.10
Cattle, fat............................................. 0.05
Cattle, meat............................................ 0.05
Cattle, meat byproducts................................. 0.05
Citrus, dried pulp...................................... 1.5
Citrus, oil............................................. 10.0
Cucumber................................................ 0.50
Fruit, citrus group 10-10............................... 0.9
Fruit, pome group 11-10................................. 0.75
Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, 2.0
subgroup 13-07F........................................
Fruit, stone, group 12-12............................... 3.0
Goat, fat............................................... 0.05
Goat, meat.............................................. 0.05
Goat, meat byproducts................................... 0.05
Hog, fat................................................ 0.05
Hog, meat............................................... 0.05
Hog, meat byproducts.................................... 0.05
Hop, dried cones........................................ 10.0
Horse, fat.............................................. 0.05
Horse, meat............................................. 0.05
Horse, meat byproducts.................................. 0.05
Mango................................................... 0.10
Milk.................................................... 0.01
Nut, tree, group 14-12.................................. 0.05
Papaya.................................................. 0.10
Sapodilla............................................... 0.10
Sapote, black........................................... 0.10
Sapote, mamey........................................... 0.10
Sheep, fat.............................................. 0.05
Sheep, meat............................................. 0.05
Sheep, meat byproducts.................................. 0.05
Star apple.............................................. 0.10
Tomato.................................................. 0.15
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. Tolerances with
regional registration, as defined in Sec. 180.1(m) are established for
residues of the insecticide pyridaben, including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities in the table below. Compliance
with the tolerance levels specified below is to be determined by
measuring the insecticide pyridaben [2-tert-butyl-5-(4-tert-
butylbenzylthio)-4-chloropyridazin-3(2H)-one] on the following plant
commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cranberry............................................... 0.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-24089 Filed 10-13-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P