Iron Oxide Yellow; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance, 78928-78932 [2016-27191]
Download as PDF
78928
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; main telephone
number: (703) 305–7090; email address:
RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2016–27212 Filed 11–9–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
I. General Information
40 CFR Part 180
A. Does this action apply to me?
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–0159; FRL–9953–21]
Iron Oxide Yellow; Exemption From the
Requirement of a Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of iron oxide
yellow (CAS Reg. No. 20344–49–4)
when used as an inert ingredient
(colorant) in pesticide formulations
intended for varroa mite control around
bee hives at a maximum concentration
not to exceed 0.15% by weight in the
pesticide formulation. Technology
Sciences Group, Inc. on behalf of Bayer
HealthCare LLC submitted a petition to
EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting the
establishment of an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of iron oxide yellow.
DATES: This regulation is effective
November 10, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before January 9, 2017, and must
be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–0159, 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
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Nov 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
through the Government Printing
Office’s e-CFR site at https://
www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2016–0159 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 January 9, 2017. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
objection or hearing request, identified
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2016–0159, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Petition for Exemption
In the Federal Register of April 25,
2016 (81 FR 24042) (FRL–9944–86),
EPA issued a document pursuant to
FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a,
announcing the filing of a pesticide
petition (PP IN–10884) by Technology
Sciences Group, Inc. (1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC
20036) on behalf of Bayer HealthCare
LLC (Animal Health, P.O. Box 390,
Shawnee Mission, KS 66201–0390). The
petition requested that 40 CFR 180.910
be amended by establishing an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of iron oxide
yellow (CAS Reg. No. 20344–49–4),
when used as an inert ingredient
(colorant) in pesticide formulations
intended for varroa mite control around
bee hives at a concentration not to
exceed 0.15% by weight. That
document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Technology
Sciences Group on behalf of Bayer
HealthCare Inc., the petitioner, which is
available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. Comments were
not received on the notice of filing.
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients
that are not active ingredients as defined
in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are
not limited to, the following types of
ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own):
Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as
polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and
diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose;
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol
dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ‘‘inert’’ is not
intended to imply nontoxicity; the
ingredient may or may not be
chemically active. Generally, EPA has
exempted inert ingredients from the
requirement of a tolerance based on the
low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish an exemption
from the requirement for a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. . . .’’
EPA establishes exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance only in those
cases where it can be clearly
demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide
chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no
appreciable risks to human health. In
order to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the
toxicity of the inert in conjunction with
possible exposure to residues of the
inert ingredient through food, drinking
water, and through other exposures that
occur as a result of pesticide use in
residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a finite tolerance is not
necessary to ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be
established.
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(c)(2)(A), and the factors specified in
FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Nov 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for iron oxide yellow
including exposure resulting from the
exemption established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with iron oxide yellow
follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as
well as the relationship of the results of
the studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children. Specific
information on the studies received and
the nature of the adverse effects caused
by iron oxide yellow as well as the noobserved-adverse-effect level (NOAEL)
and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies
are discussed in this unit.
The acute oral toxicity in rats, mice
and dogs is low for iron oxide yellow.
In an eight-generation reproduction
study with rats, iron oxide was
administered in the feed at an estimated
oral dose of 25 milligram (mg) iron/day.
No signs of toxicity were evident,
reproductive performance was not
affected.
Ten dogs were fed, from 1 to 9 years,
diets containing iron oxide. Daily
consumption was estimated to be 428
mg/dog. Two dogs experienced minor
irregularities with stools, no other
toxicological adverse effects were seen.
Four dogs were injected (i.v.) weekly
for 10 weeks until each dog had
received a total of 0.5 to 1.0 g/kg. There
were signs of retinitis pigmentosa
however there were no negative effects
in hepatic function tests and biopsies of
the liver, spleen, pancreas and other
organs. Hemochromatosis was not
induced.
Iron oxide yellow is poorly absorbed
by mammalian systems after ingestion
but data indicate it can be absorbed as
iron after solubilization in the stomach
and reduction to the ferrous form in the
duodenum. Absorption of ingested iron
in mammalian systems occurs primarily
in the upper small intestine. Iron
absorption is tightly regulated
biologically such that individuals with
low body iron stores absorb more iron
while those with excess iron stores
absorb less iron. Iron balance in the
body is maintained by regulation of iron
absorption in the upper small intestine
because there are no specific
mechanisms to eliminate excess iron.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
78929
Iron is an essential element necessary
for maintenance of mammalian
metabolic systems. Iron intake varies
depending on the source of iron, the
foods consumed with the iron, the iron
oxidation state and the iron needs of the
body. For instance, iron from animal
origin (heme-iron) is more readily
absorbed than iron from vegetable
origins (5–20% for meats; 1–10% from
vegetable iron). The non-heme iron
absorption depends on solubilization of
plant-based or inorganic iron in the
stomach prior to entry in the intestines.
Non-heme iron from ferrous salts is
more readily absorbed than iron from
ionizable ferric salts, and iron from
ferric oxides and hydroxides is the least
readily absorbed. Non-heme iron is
transported into the duodenal mucosal
cells via a transmembrane metal
transporter protein that is upregulated
when body iron stores are low and
down-regulated when body iron stores
are high. This mechanism minimizes
the likelihood of excess systemic
exposure to iron.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which the NOAEL and the
LOAEL are identified. Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
An acute effect was not found in the
database therefore an acute dietary
assessment is not necessary. A NOAEL
has not been identified for risk
assessment purposes. However, the
acceptable daily intake (ADI) level
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
78930
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
identified by the World Health
Organization Joint Expert Committee on
Food and Agriculture is used as a safe
exposure level for risk assessment
purposes.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to iron oxide yellow, EPA
considered exposure under the
proposed exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. EPA
assessed dietary exposures from iron
oxide yellow in food as follows:
Dietary exposure (food and drinking
water) to iron oxide yellow could occur
following ingestion of honey with
residues from treated beehives. Because
no adverse effects attributable to a single
exposure of iron oxide yellow are seen
in the toxicity databases, an acute
dietary risk assessment is not necessary.
For the chronic dietary risk assessment,
EPA used the Dietary Exposure
Evaluation Model software with the
Food Commodity Intake Database
(DEEM–FCIDTM, Version 3.16, and food
consumption information from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s)
2003–2008 National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We
Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). One
hundred percent crop treated was
assumed, default processing factors, and
tolerance-level residues for honey and
use limitations of not more than 0.15%
by weight in pesticide formulations.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. For the purpose of the screeninglevel dietary risk assessment to support
this request for an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for iron oxide
yellow, a conservative drinking water
concentration value of 100 parts per
billion (ppb) based on screening-level
modeling was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water for the
chronic dietary risk assessments for
parent compound. These values were
directly entered into the dietary
exposure model
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers),
carpets, swimming pools, and hard
surface disinfection on walls, floors,
tables). Iron oxide yellow might be used
in inert ingredients in products that are
registered for specific uses that may
result in residential exposure, such as
pesticides used in and around the home,
personal (care) products, and cosmetics.
The Agency conducted an assessment to
represent worst-case residential dietary
exposure from honey only. The Agency
agrees with the World Health
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Nov 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
Organization Joint Expert Committee on
Food and Agriculture opinion that there
was no need for additional human
absorption studies. The WHO JEFCA
committee concluded that it is unlikely
that intake of iron oxides from all
sources would exceed the Acceptable
Daily Intake of 0–0.5 milligram/
kilogram/day (mg/kg/day). Thus the
JEFCA committee did not prepare a
toxicological monograph on the iron
oxides.
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 iron oxide yellow
to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and
iron oxide yellow does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that iron oxide yellow does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity
with other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
Food Quality Protection Act Safety
Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this
provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
The toxicity database for iron oxide
yellow contains an eight generation
reproduction/developmental toxicity
screening study with the rat. No signs of
toxicity were evident and reproductive
performance was not negatively
affected. There is no indication of
neurotoxicity or immunotoxicity in the
available studies with dogs and rat
therefore, there is no need to require
neurotoxicity or immunotoxicity
studies. Qualitative fetal susceptibility
was observed in the 2-generation
toxicity study in rats. However, concern
for fetal effects are low since they only
occurred in the presence of maternal
toxicity and protecting against maternal
toxicity will subsequently prevent fetal
toxicity. In addition, the ADI of 0.5 mg/
kg/day, will be protective of fetal effects.
In addition, the Agency used
conservative exposure estimates, with
100 percent crop treated (PCT),
tolerance-level residues, conservative
drinking water modeling numbers, and
a worst-case assessment of potential
residential exposure for infants and
children.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
Section 408(b)(2)(c) of the FFDCA
provides that EPA shall apply an
additional 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 that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. Due to the expected low
toxicity of iron oxide yellow, EPA has
not used a safety factor analysis to
assess the risk. For the same reasons the
additional tenfold safety factor is
unnecessary.
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
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account acute
exposure estimates from dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, iron oxide yellow is
not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to iron oxide
yellow from food (honey) and water will
utilize 0.0% of the ADI for children 1–
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
2 years old, the population group
receiving the greatest exposure.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
Iron oxide yellow may be used as an
inert ingredient in pesticide products
that could result in short-term
residential exposure and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
(honey). Using the exposure
assumptions described above, EPA has
concluded that the combined short-term
food, water, and residential exposure
result in aggregate MOEs of 6,758 for
both adult males and females
respectively. As the level of concern is
for MOEs that are lower than 100, this
MOEs is not of concern.
EPA has concluded the combined
short-term food, water, and residential
exposures result in an aggregate MOE of
4,347 for children. As the level of
concern is for MOEs that are lower than
100, this MOEs is not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Iron oxide yellow may be used as an
inert ingredient in pesticide products
that could result in short-term
residential exposure and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
(honey). Using the exposure
assumptions described above, EPA has
concluded that the combined short-term
food, water, and residential exposure
result in aggregate MOEs of 6,758 for
both adult males and females
respectively. As the level of concern is
for MOEs that are lower than 100, this
MOEs is not of concern.
EPA has concluded the combined
short-term food, water, and residential
exposures result in an aggregate MOE of
4,347 for children. As the level of
concern is for MOEs that are lower than
100, this MOEs is not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Iron oxide yellow may be used as
inert ingredients in pesticide products
that could result in intermediate-term
residential exposure and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
(honey) and water. Using the exposure
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Nov 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
assumptions described above, EPA has
concluded that the combined
intermediate-term food, water, and
residential exposures result in aggregate
MOEs of 6,758 for adult males and
females. As the level of concern is for
MOEs that are lower than 100, this MOE
is not of concern. EPA has concluded
the combined intermediate-term food,
water, and residential exposures result
in an aggregate MOE of 4,347 for
children. As the level of concern is for
MOEs that are lower than 100, this MOE
is not of concern.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the data in the
toxicological database iron oxide yellow
is considered not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to iron oxide
yellow residues.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An analytical method is not required
for enforcement purposes since the
Agency is not establishing a numerical
tolerance for residues of iron oxide
yellow in or on any food commodities.
EPA is establishing a limitation on the
amount of iron oxide yellow that may be
used in pesticide formulations applied
to growing crops and raw agricultural
commodities after harvest. That
limitation will be enforced through the
pesticide registration process under the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136
et seq. EPA will not register any
pesticide formulation for use on
growing crops or raw agricultural
commodities after harvest for sale or
distribution that exceed 0.15% of iron
oxide yellow.
VI. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance is established
under 40 CFR 180.910 for iron oxide
yellow (CAS Reg. No. 20344–49–4)
when used as an inert ingredient
(colorant) in pesticide products
intended for varroa mite control around
bee hives at a concentration not to
exceed 0.15% by weight in the end-use
product formulation.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes exemptions to
the requirement for a tolerance under
FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a
petition submitted to the Agency. The
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
78931
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 exemptions 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
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
78932
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VIII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
PART 180—[AMENDED]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
■
Dated: October 24, 2016.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.910, add alphabetically the
inert ingredient ‘‘Iron oxide yellow
(CAS Reg. No. 20344–49–4)’’ to the table
to read as follows:
■
§ 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and
post-harvest; exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance.
*
*
*
*
*
Inert ingredients
Limits
Uses
*
*
Iron oxide yellow (CAS Reg. No.
20344–49–4).
*
*
Not to exceed 0.15% by weight of pesticide formulation.
*
*
*
Colorant in pesticide formulations for varroa mite
control around bee hives
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2015–0745; FRL–9954–04]
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.
Trifloxystrobin; Pesticide Tolerances
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
[FR Doc. 2016–27191 Filed 11–9–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of trifloxystrobin
in or on Cottonseed subgroup 20C;
Cotton, gin byproducts; and amends the
existing tolerance on Corn, field, forage.
Bayer CropScience LP requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
November 10, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before January 9, 2017, and must
be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2015–0745, 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
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Nov 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
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).
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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.
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2015–0745 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 January 9, 2017. Addresses for
mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40
CFR 178.25(b).
In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please
submit a copy of the filing (excluding
any Confidential Business Information
(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket.
Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior
notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your
objection or hearing request, identified
E:\FR\FM\10NOR1.SGM
10NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 218 (Thursday, November 10, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78928-78932]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27191]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0159; FRL-9953-21]
Iron Oxide Yellow; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of iron oxide yellow (CAS Reg. No. 20344-
49-4) when used as an inert ingredient (colorant) in pesticide
formulations intended for varroa mite control around bee hives at a
maximum concentration not to exceed 0.15% by weight in the pesticide
formulation. Technology Sciences Group, Inc. on behalf of Bayer
HealthCare LLC submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting the establishment of an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This regulation
eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level for
residues of iron oxide yellow.
DATES: This regulation is effective November 10, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before January 9, 2017,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0159, is available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Goodis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
number: (703) 305-7090; email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0159 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
January 9, 2017. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0159, by one of
the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Petition for Exemption
In the Federal Register of April 25, 2016 (81 FR 24042) (FRL-9944-
86), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C.
346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP IN-10884) by
Technology Sciences Group, Inc. (1150 18th Street NW., Suite 1000,
Washington, DC 20036) on behalf of Bayer HealthCare LLC (Animal Health,
P.O. Box 390, Shawnee Mission, KS 66201-0390). The petition requested
that 40 CFR 180.910 be amended by establishing an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of iron oxide yellow (CAS Reg.
No. 20344-49-4), when used as an inert ingredient (colorant) in
pesticide formulations intended for varroa mite control around bee
hives at a concentration not to exceed 0.15% by weight. That document
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Technology Sciences
Group on behalf of Bayer HealthCare Inc., the petitioner, which is
available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. Comments were not
received on the notice of filing.
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose;
[[Page 78929]]
wetting, spreading, and dispersing agents; propellants in aerosol
dispensers; microencapsulating agents; and emulsifiers. The term
``inert'' is not intended to imply nontoxicity; the ingredient may or
may not be chemically active. Generally, EPA has exempted inert
ingredients from the requirement of a tolerance based on the low
toxicity of the individual inert ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue. . . .''
EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the
inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures
that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA
is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be established.
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for iron oxide yellow including
exposure resulting from the exemption established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with iron oxide yellow
follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by iron oxide yellow as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in this
unit.
The acute oral toxicity in rats, mice and dogs is low for iron
oxide yellow. In an eight-generation reproduction study with rats, iron
oxide was administered in the feed at an estimated oral dose of 25
milligram (mg) iron/day. No signs of toxicity were evident,
reproductive performance was not affected.
Ten dogs were fed, from 1 to 9 years, diets containing iron oxide.
Daily consumption was estimated to be 428 mg/dog. Two dogs experienced
minor irregularities with stools, no other toxicological adverse
effects were seen.
Four dogs were injected (i.v.) weekly for 10 weeks until each dog
had received a total of 0.5 to 1.0 g/kg. There were signs of retinitis
pigmentosa however there were no negative effects in hepatic function
tests and biopsies of the liver, spleen, pancreas and other organs.
Hemochromatosis was not induced.
Iron oxide yellow is poorly absorbed by mammalian systems after
ingestion but data indicate it can be absorbed as iron after
solubilization in the stomach and reduction to the ferrous form in the
duodenum. Absorption of ingested iron in mammalian systems occurs
primarily in the upper small intestine. Iron absorption is tightly
regulated biologically such that individuals with low body iron stores
absorb more iron while those with excess iron stores absorb less iron.
Iron balance in the body is maintained by regulation of iron absorption
in the upper small intestine because there are no specific mechanisms
to eliminate excess iron.
Iron is an essential element necessary for maintenance of mammalian
metabolic systems. Iron intake varies depending on the source of iron,
the foods consumed with the iron, the iron oxidation state and the iron
needs of the body. For instance, iron from animal origin (heme-iron) is
more readily absorbed than iron from vegetable origins (5-20% for
meats; 1-10% from vegetable iron). The non-heme iron absorption depends
on solubilization of plant-based or inorganic iron in the stomach prior
to entry in the intestines. Non-heme iron from ferrous salts is more
readily absorbed than iron from ionizable ferric salts, and iron from
ferric oxides and hydroxides is the least readily absorbed. Non-heme
iron is transported into the duodenal mucosal cells via a transmembrane
metal transporter protein that is upregulated when body iron stores are
low and down-regulated when body iron stores are high. This mechanism
minimizes the likelihood of excess systemic exposure to iron.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which the NOAEL and the LOAEL are identified.
Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with the POD to
calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a population-
adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe margin of
exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of the
adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
An acute effect was not found in the database therefore an acute
dietary assessment is not necessary. A NOAEL has not been identified
for risk assessment purposes. However, the acceptable daily intake
(ADI) level
[[Page 78930]]
identified by the World Health Organization Joint Expert Committee on
Food and Agriculture is used as a safe exposure level for risk
assessment purposes.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to iron oxide yellow, EPA considered exposure under the
proposed exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. EPA assessed
dietary exposures from iron oxide yellow in food as follows:
Dietary exposure (food and drinking water) to iron oxide yellow
could occur following ingestion of honey with residues from treated
beehives. Because no adverse effects attributable to a single exposure
of iron oxide yellow are seen in the toxicity databases, an acute
dietary risk assessment is not necessary. For the chronic dietary risk
assessment, EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software
with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCIDTM,
Version 3.16, and food consumption information from the U.S. Department
of Agriculture's (USDA's) 2003-2008 National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). One hundred
percent crop treated was assumed, default processing factors, and
tolerance-level residues for honey and use limitations of not more than
0.15% by weight in pesticide formulations.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. For the purpose of the
screening-level dietary risk assessment to support this request for an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for iron oxide yellow, a
conservative drinking water concentration value of 100 parts per
billion (ppb) based on screening-level modeling was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water for the chronic dietary risk assessments
for parent compound. These values were directly entered into the
dietary exposure model
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming
pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables). Iron
oxide yellow might be used in inert ingredients in products that are
registered for specific uses that may result in residential exposure,
such as pesticides used in and around the home, personal (care)
products, and cosmetics. The Agency conducted an assessment to
represent worst-case residential dietary exposure from honey only. The
Agency agrees with the World Health Organization Joint Expert Committee
on Food and Agriculture opinion that there was no need for additional
human absorption studies. The WHO JEFCA committee concluded that it is
unlikely that intake of iron oxides from all sources would exceed the
Acceptable Daily Intake of 0-0.5 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day).
Thus the JEFCA committee did not prepare a toxicological monograph on
the iron oxides.
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 iron oxide yellow to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and iron oxide yellow does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For
the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
iron oxide yellow does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
Section 408(b)(2)(c) of the FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an
additional 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 that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. Due to the expected low toxicity of iron oxide yellow,
EPA has not used a safety factor analysis to assess the risk. For the
same reasons the additional tenfold safety factor is unnecessary.
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF). In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional
safety factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. The toxicity database for
iron oxide yellow contains an eight generation reproduction/
developmental toxicity screening study with the rat. No signs of
toxicity were evident and reproductive performance was not negatively
affected. There is no indication of neurotoxicity or immunotoxicity in
the available studies with dogs and rat therefore, there is no need to
require neurotoxicity or immunotoxicity studies. Qualitative fetal
susceptibility was observed in the 2-generation toxicity study in rats.
However, concern for fetal effects are low since they only occurred in
the presence of maternal toxicity and protecting against maternal
toxicity will subsequently prevent fetal toxicity. In addition, the ADI
of 0.5 mg/kg/day, will be protective of fetal effects. In addition, the
Agency used conservative exposure estimates, with 100 percent crop
treated (PCT), tolerance-level residues, conservative drinking water
modeling numbers, and a worst-case assessment of potential residential
exposure for infants and children.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
iron oxide yellow is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
iron oxide yellow from food (honey) and water will utilize 0.0% of the
ADI for children 1-
[[Page 78931]]
2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
Iron oxide yellow may be used as an inert ingredient in pesticide
products that could result in short-term residential exposure and the
Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic
exposure through food (honey). Using the exposure assumptions described
above, EPA has concluded that the combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposure result in aggregate MOEs of 6,758 for both adult
males and females respectively. As the level of concern is for MOEs
that are lower than 100, this MOEs is not of concern.
EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures result in an aggregate MOE of 4,347 for children.
As the level of concern is for MOEs that are lower than 100, this MOEs
is not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
Iron oxide yellow may be used as an inert ingredient in pesticide
products that could result in short-term residential exposure and the
Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic
exposure through food (honey). Using the exposure assumptions described
above, EPA has concluded that the combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposure result in aggregate MOEs of 6,758 for both adult
males and females respectively. As the level of concern is for MOEs
that are lower than 100, this MOEs is not of concern.
EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures result in an aggregate MOE of 4,347 for children.
As the level of concern is for MOEs that are lower than 100, this MOEs
is not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
Iron oxide yellow may be used as inert ingredients in pesticide
products that could result in intermediate-term residential exposure
and the Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate
chronic exposure through food (honey) and water. Using the exposure
assumptions described above, EPA has concluded that the combined
intermediate-term food, water, and residential exposures result in
aggregate MOEs of 6,758 for adult males and females. As the level of
concern is for MOEs that are lower than 100, this MOE is not of
concern. EPA has concluded the combined intermediate-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in an aggregate MOE of 4,347 for
children. As the level of concern is for MOEs that are lower than 100,
this MOE is not of concern.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the data in
the toxicological database iron oxide yellow is considered not expected
to pose a cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to iron oxide yellow residues.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is not establishing a numerical tolerance for residues of
iron oxide yellow in or on any food commodities. EPA is establishing a
limitation on the amount of iron oxide yellow that may be used in
pesticide formulations applied to growing crops and raw agricultural
commodities after harvest. That limitation will be enforced through the
pesticide registration process under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. EPA will
not register any pesticide formulation for use on growing crops or raw
agricultural commodities after harvest for sale or distribution that
exceed 0.15% of iron oxide yellow.
VI. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established under 40 CFR 180.910 for iron oxide yellow (CAS Reg. No.
20344-49-4) when used as an inert ingredient (colorant) in pesticide
products intended for varroa mite control around bee hives at a
concentration not to exceed 0.15% by weight in the end-use product
formulation.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes exemptions to the requirement for a
tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition
submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order
12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review
under Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval under the 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 exemptions 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
[[Page 78932]]
consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VIII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 24, 2016.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. In Sec. 180.910, add alphabetically the inert ingredient ``Iron
oxide yellow (CAS Reg. No. 20344-49-4)'' to the table to read as
follows:
Sec. 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inert ingredients Limits Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Iron oxide yellow (CAS Reg. No. Not to exceed Colorant in
20344-49-4). 0.15% by weight pesticide
of pesticide formulations for
formulation. varroa mite
control around
bee hives
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2016-27191 Filed 11-9-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P