Fenazaquin; Pesticide Tolerances, 24067-24071 [2017-10751]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 100 / Thursday, May 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
Olive ......................................
*
*
*
*
*
I. General Information
*
*
0.01
*
*
*
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–10763 Filed 5–24–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–0029 FRL–9961–99]
Fenazaquin; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of fenazaquin in
or on hop, dried cones; nuts, tree, group
14–12; pineapple; and tea, dried. Gowan
Company requested these tolerances
under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective May
25, 2017. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
July 24, 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–2016–0029, 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.
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 May 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2016–0029 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 July 24, 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–
2016–0029, by one of the following
methods:
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
24067
• 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
Tolerances
In the Federal Registers of March 16,
2016 (81 FR 14030) (FRL–9942–86);
May 19, 2016 (81 FR 31581) (FRL–9946–
02); and August 12, 2016 (81 FR 53379)
(FRL–9949–53) EPA issued documents
pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing
of pesticide petitions (PP 6F8442, PP
5F8429, and PP 6E8466) by Gowan
Company, P.O. Box 5569, Yuma, AZ
85366–5569. The petitions requested
that 40 CFR 180.632 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of
the miticide/insecticide fenazaquin, 4[2-[4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)
phenyl]ethoxy]quinazoline, in or on
hops at 30 parts per million (ppm) (PP
6F8442); nuts, tree, group 14–12 at 0.02
ppm (PP 5F8429); pineapple at 0.2 ppm
(PP 6E8466); and tea at 9 ppm (PP
6E8466). The petitions also requested
that the existing tolerance for almond at
0.2 ppm be removed upon
establishment of the above tolerance for
nut, tree group 14–12. Those documents
referenced summaries of the petitions
prepared by Gowan Company, the
registrant, which are available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments were received on the Notices
of Filing. EPA’s response to these
comments is discussed 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
E:\FR\FM\25MYR1.SGM
25MYR1
24068
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 100 / Thursday, May 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
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 fenazaquin
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with fenazaquin follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
The most consistently observed
effects of fenazaquin exposure across
species, sexes, and treatment durations
were decreases in body weight, food
consumption, and food efficiency.
These effects were consistent with the
commonly observed effects for
compounds that disrupt mitochondrial
electron transport system. Fenazaquin is
a member of this class of chemicals.
Fenazaquin did not produce
developmental effects in rats and rabbits
with prenatal exposure. It also did not
cause reproductive effects, although it
produced decreased body weight in the
offspring at a dose where maternal body
reduction also occurred in the
reproduction study. The available data
did not demonstrate clear neurotoxicity,
immunotoxicity, or genotoxicity. The
data in the immunotoxicity study
showed an increased incidence of
ataxia/hypo-activity with gavage dosing,
but the effects were judged to be
resulting from general malaise.
Fenazaquin is also classified as not
likely to be carcinogenic to humans,
based on a lack of treatment-related
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 May 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
cancer effects in two carcinogenicity
studies.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by fenazaquin 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,
‘‘Fenazaquin (044501); Human Health
Risk Assessment in Support of Proposed
Uses on tree nuts, group 14–12, and
Hops, Dried Cones’’ in pp. 11–17 in
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–
0029.
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 fenazaquin used for
human risk assessment is discussed in
Unit III.B. of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of May 6, 2015 (80
FR 25953) (FRL–9925–97).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to fenazaquin, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing
fenazaquin tolerances in 40 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
180.632. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from fenazaquin 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
fenazaquin. In estimating acute dietary
exposure, EPA used the Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Model software
with the Food Commodity Intake
Database (DEEM–FCID) Version 3.16.
This software uses 2003–2008 food
consumption data from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s)
National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA assumed
tolerance level residues, default
processing factors, and 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) for all proposed and
registered uses.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used DEEM–FCID, Version 3.16
software with 2003–2008 food
consumption data from the USDA’s
NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels
in food, EPA assumed tolerance level
residues, default processing factors, and
100 PCT for all proposed and registered
uses.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that fenazaquin 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. EPA did
not use anticipated residue or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for fenazaquin. Tolerance level residues
and 100 PCT were assumed for all food
commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. In drinking water, the residues of
concern are fenazaquin (parent) and two
metabolites: Metabolite M29 or 2-(4-{2[(2-hydroxyquinazolin-4yl)oxy]ethyl}phenyl)-2methylpropanoic acid and its tautomer
2-methyl-2-(4-{2-[(2-oxo-1,2dihydroquinazolin-4yl)oxy]ethyl}phenyl)propanoic acid;
and Metabolite 1 or 4-[2-(4-tert-butylphenyl)-ethoxy]-quinazolin-2-ol and its
tautomer 4-[2-(4-tertbutylphenyl)ethoxy]quinazolin-2(1H)one. The Agency used screening-level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for fenazaquin in drinking water. These
E:\FR\FM\25MYR1.SGM
25MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 100 / Thursday, May 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of fenazaquin.
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.
Based on the Pesticide in Water
Calculator (PWC version 1.52), the
estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) of fenazaquin and its
metabolites of concern for acute
exposures are estimated to be 23.8 parts
per billion (ppb) for surface water and
1.112 ppb for ground water, for chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments
are estimated to be 3.19 ppb for surface
water and 0.891 ppb 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 23.8 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 3.19 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).
Fenazaquin is currently registered for
the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Ornamental
plants. There is a potential for exposure
associated with handler (i.e., mixing,
loading and applying), as well as postapplication exposure from the use of
fenazaquin on ornamental plants.
However, for residential exposure
associated with handlers, all registered
fenazaquin product labels with
residential use sites (e.g., ornamental
plants) require that handlers wear
specific clothing (e.g., long-sleeve shirt/
long pants/chemical resistant gloves)
and/or use personal protective
equipment (PPE). Therefore, the Agency
has made the assumption that these
products are not for homeowner use,
and has not conducted a quantitative
residential handler assessment.
With respect to the potential
residential post-application exposure
from the use of fenazaquin on
ornamental plants, since there is (1) no
adverse systemic hazard via the dermal
route of exposure; (2) inhalation
exposures are typically negligible in
outdoor settings; and (3) there is no
incidental oral exposure expected from
fenazaquin use on ornamental plants, a
residential post-application assessment
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 May 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
is unnecessary. Furthermore, since the
extent to which young children engage
in activities associated with these areas
or utilize these areas for prolonged
periods of play is low, significant nondietary ingestion exposure is not
expected.
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticidescience-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/
standard-operating-proceduresresidential-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.’’
Unlike other pesticides, for which
EPA followed a cumulative risk
approach based on a common
mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not
made a common mechanism of toxicity
finding as to fenazaquin and any other
substances, and fenazaquin does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has not assumed that
fenazaquin has a common mechanism of
toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA’s efforts to
determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to
evaluate the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at https://
www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/cumulativeassessment-risk-pesticides.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
24069
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
Susceptibility/sensitivity in the
developing animals was evaluated in
developmental toxicity studies in rats
and rabbits as well as a reproduction
and fertility study in rats. The data
showed no evidence of increased
sensitivity/susceptibility in the
developing fetuses or young animals.
Clear NOAELs and LOAELs are
available for all the parental and
offspring effects.
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 fenazaquin
is complete.
ii. The available data do not provide
evidence that fenazaquin is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional uncertainty factors (UFs) to
account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
fenazaquin results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100 PCT and
tolerance level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to fenazaquin in
drinking water. These assessments will
not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by fenazaquin.
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
fenazaquin will occupy 11% of the
aPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
E:\FR\FM\25MYR1.SGM
25MYR1
24070
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 100 / Thursday, May 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to fenazaquin
from food and water will utilize 9.6% of
the cPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure, when the additional uses for
hops, dried cones and nuts, tree, group
14–12 are considered. The chronic
exposure will increase to 9.9% of the
cPAD for children 1–2 years old, when
tea and pineapple are also assessed (See
‘‘Fenazaquin, Acute and Chronic
Aggregate Dietary (Food and Drinking
Water) Exposure and Risk Assessments
to Support Use of the Insecticide
(Without Section 3 Registration) on
Imported Tea and Imported Pineapple’’
in docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2016–0029). Based on the explanation
in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of fenazaquin is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Because there is no
dermal endpoint and no potential shortterm residential inhalation or incidental
oral exposure to fenazaquin, a shortterm risk is not expected.
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).
Because there is no dermal endpoint
and no potential intermediate-term
inhalation or oral residential exposure
to fenazaquin, an intermediate-term risk
is not expected.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
fenazaquin is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to fenazaquin
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology,
high-performance liquid
chromatography with positive ion
electrospray ionization with tandem
mass spectrometric detection (LC–MS/
MS), is available to enforce the tolerance
expression. However, for tea, residues
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 May 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
were analyzed using gas
chromatography with mass
spectrometry (GC–MS) in selected ion
monitoring mode.
The method may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;
telephone number: (410) 305–2905;
email address: residuemethods@
epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established MRLs
for fenazaquin in/on hop, dried cones;
nuts, tree, group 14–12; pineapple; or
tea, dried.
C. Response to Comments
The majority of comments submitted
to this docket concerned chemicals or
actions not associated with the
fenazaquin petitions. One comment was
submitted by the Center for Biological
Diversity (CBD) in response to the
Notice of Filing for PP 6F8442 and PP
5F8429 and was primarily concerned
about environmental risks and Agency
compliance with any relevant
obligations under the Endangered
Species Act. This comment is not
relevant to the Agency’s evaluation of
safety of the fenazaquin tolerances;
section 408 of the FFDCA focuses on
potential harms to human health, not
effects on the environment.
The three remaining comments were
anonymous public comments submitted
in response to the Notice of Filing,
which stated, in part, to ‘‘Deny this
petition. It is harmful and is a toxic
chemical’’; ‘‘there is insufficient
information on all facets of hazard from
this toxic chemical’’; and ‘‘We, as
Americans, do not need or want any
more EPA regulations.’’ The Agency
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
recognizes that some individuals believe
that pesticides should be banned on
agricultural crops; however, these
comments provide no supporting
information upon which to evaluate the
safety of pesticide. The existing legal
framework provided by section 408 of
the FFDCA states that tolerances may be
set when persons seeking such
tolerances or exemptions have
demonstrated that the pesticide meets
the safety standard imposed by that
statute. The Agency has evaluated the
available information and determined
that these tolerances are safe.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of fenazaquin, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on
hop, dried cones at 30 ppm; nuts, tree,
group 14–12 at 0.02 ppm; pineapple at
0.20 ppm; and tea, dried at 9.0 ppm. In
addition, the Agency is removing the
separate tolerance for almonds as it is
unnecessary because almond is a
commodity covered by the crop group
tolerances for nuts, tree, group 14–12.
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
E:\FR\FM\25MYR1.SGM
25MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 100 / Thursday, May 25, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
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: May 1, 2017.
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:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:57 May 24, 2017
Jkt 241001
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.632, amend the table in
paragraph (a) as follows:
■ a. Remove the entry for ‘‘Almond’’.
■ b. Add alphabetically the entries for
‘‘hop, dried cones’’; ‘‘nuts, tree, group
14–12’’; ‘‘pineapple’’; and ‘‘tea, dried’’.
■ c. Add a footnote at the end of the
table.
The additions read as follows:
■
§ 180.632 Fenazaquin; Tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Hop, dried cones ..........................
*
30.0
*
*
*
*
Pineapple 1 ....................................
Nuts, Tree, Group 14–12 .............
Tea, dried 1 ...................................
*
0.20
0.02
9.0
1 There
are no U.S. registrations as of May
25, 2017 for use on pineapple and tea.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–10751 Filed 5–24–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–0143; FRL–9960–76]
Isopyrazam; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of isopyrazam in
or on pepper, bell; tomato; and
vegetable, cucurbit, subgroup 9A.
Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC,
requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
SUMMARY:
This regulation is effective May
25, 2017. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
July 24, 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).
DATES:
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–0143, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket)
in the Environmental Protection Agency
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
24071
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 L. Goodis, P.E., 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/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–2016–0143 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
E:\FR\FM\25MYR1.SGM
25MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 100 (Thursday, May 25, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24067-24071]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10751]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0029 FRL-9961-99]
Fenazaquin; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
fenazaquin in or on hop, dried cones; nuts, tree, group 14-12;
pineapple; and tea, dried. Gowan Company requested these tolerances
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective May 25, 2017. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before July 24, 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-2016-0029, is available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Goodis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
number: (703) 305-7090; email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0029 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
July 24, 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-2016-0029, 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 Tolerances
In the Federal Registers of March 16, 2016 (81 FR 14030) (FRL-9942-
86); May 19, 2016 (81 FR 31581) (FRL-9946-02); and August 12, 2016 (81
FR 53379) (FRL-9949-53) EPA issued documents pursuant to FFDCA section
408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of pesticide
petitions (PP 6F8442, PP 5F8429, and PP 6E8466) by Gowan Company, P.O.
Box 5569, Yuma, AZ 85366-5569. The petitions requested that 40 CFR
180.632 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the
miticide/insecticide fenazaquin, 4-[2-[4-(1,1-
dimethylethyl)phenyl]ethoxy]quinazoline, in or on hops at 30 parts per
million (ppm) (PP 6F8442); nuts, tree, group 14-12 at 0.02 ppm (PP
5F8429); pineapple at 0.2 ppm (PP 6E8466); and tea at 9 ppm (PP
6E8466). The petitions also requested that the existing tolerance for
almond at 0.2 ppm be removed upon establishment of the above tolerance
for nut, tree group 14-12. Those documents referenced summaries of the
petitions prepared by Gowan Company, the registrant, which are
available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. Comments were
received on the Notices of Filing. EPA's response to these comments is
discussed 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
[[Page 24068]]
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 fenazaquin including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with fenazaquin follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
The most consistently observed effects of fenazaquin exposure
across species, sexes, and treatment durations were decreases in body
weight, food consumption, and food efficiency. These effects were
consistent with the commonly observed effects for compounds that
disrupt mitochondrial electron transport system. Fenazaquin is a member
of this class of chemicals.
Fenazaquin did not produce developmental effects in rats and
rabbits with prenatal exposure. It also did not cause reproductive
effects, although it produced decreased body weight in the offspring at
a dose where maternal body reduction also occurred in the reproduction
study. The available data did not demonstrate clear neurotoxicity,
immunotoxicity, or genotoxicity. The data in the immunotoxicity study
showed an increased incidence of ataxia/hypo-activity with gavage
dosing, but the effects were judged to be resulting from general
malaise. Fenazaquin is also classified as not likely to be carcinogenic
to humans, based on a lack of treatment-related cancer effects in two
carcinogenicity studies.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by fenazaquin 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, ``Fenazaquin (044501); Human Health
Risk Assessment in Support of Proposed Uses on tree nuts, group 14-12,
and Hops, Dried Cones'' in pp. 11-17 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2016-0029.
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 fenazaquin used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of May 6, 2015 (80 FR 25953) (FRL-
9925-97).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to fenazaquin, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing fenazaquin tolerances in 40 CFR
180.632. EPA assessed dietary exposures from fenazaquin 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 fenazaquin. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
software with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID) Version
3.16. This software uses 2003-2008 food consumption data from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance level residues, default
processing factors, and 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all proposed
and registered uses.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used DEEM-FCID, Version 3.16 software with 2003-2008
food consumption data from the USDA's NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue
levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance level residues, default
processing factors, and 100 PCT for all proposed and registered uses.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that fenazaquin 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.
EPA did not use anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary
assessment for fenazaquin. Tolerance level residues and 100 PCT were
assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. In drinking water, the
residues of concern are fenazaquin (parent) and two metabolites:
Metabolite M29 or 2-(4-{2-[(2-hydroxyquinazolin-4-
yl)oxy]ethyl{time} phenyl)-2-methylpropanoic acid and its tautomer 2-
methyl-2-(4-{2-[(2-oxo-1,2-dihydroquinazolin-4-
yl)oxy]ethyl{time} phenyl)propanoic acid; and Metabolite 1 or 4-[2-(4-
tert-butyl-phenyl)-ethoxy]-quinazolin-2-ol and its tautomer 4-[2-(4-
tert-butylphenyl)ethoxy]quinazolin-2(1H)-one. The Agency used
screening-level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis
and risk assessment for fenazaquin in drinking water. These
[[Page 24069]]
simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and
fate/transport characteristics of fenazaquin. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure
assessment can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
Based on the Pesticide in Water Calculator (PWC version 1.52), the
estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of fenazaquin and its
metabolites of concern for acute exposures are estimated to be 23.8
parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 1.112 ppb for ground
water, for chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated
to be 3.19 ppb for surface water and 0.891 ppb 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 23.8 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 3.19 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).
Fenazaquin is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: Ornamental plants. There is a
potential for exposure associated with handler (i.e., mixing, loading
and applying), as well as post-application exposure from the use of
fenazaquin on ornamental plants. However, for residential exposure
associated with handlers, all registered fenazaquin product labels with
residential use sites (e.g., ornamental plants) require that handlers
wear specific clothing (e.g., long-sleeve shirt/long pants/chemical
resistant gloves) and/or use personal protective equipment (PPE).
Therefore, the Agency has made the assumption that these products are
not for homeowner use, and has not conducted a quantitative residential
handler assessment.
With respect to the potential residential post-application exposure
from the use of fenazaquin on ornamental plants, since there is (1) no
adverse systemic hazard via the dermal route of exposure; (2)
inhalation exposures are typically negligible in outdoor settings; and
(3) there is no incidental oral exposure expected from fenazaquin use
on ornamental plants, a residential post-application assessment is
unnecessary. Furthermore, since the extent to which young children
engage in activities associated with these areas or utilize these areas
for prolonged periods of play is low, significant non-dietary ingestion
exposure is not expected.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
Unlike other pesticides, for which EPA followed a cumulative risk
approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made a
common mechanism of toxicity finding as to fenazaquin and any other
substances, and fenazaquin does not appear to produce a toxic
metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that fenazaquin has a
common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information
regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the 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. Susceptibility/sensitivity
in the developing animals was evaluated in developmental toxicity
studies in rats and rabbits as well as a reproduction and fertility
study in rats. The data showed no evidence of increased sensitivity/
susceptibility in the developing fetuses or young animals. Clear NOAELs
and LOAELs are available for all the parental and offspring effects.
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 fenazaquin is complete.
ii. The available data do not provide evidence that fenazaquin is a
neurotoxic chemical and there is no need for a developmental
neurotoxicity study or additional uncertainty factors (UFs) to account
for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that fenazaquin results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100 PCT and tolerance level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to fenazaquin in drinking water. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by fenazaquin.
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 fenazaquin will occupy 11% of the aPAD for children 1-2 years old,
the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
[[Page 24070]]
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
fenazaquin from food and water will utilize 9.6% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure, when the additional uses for hops, dried cones and nuts,
tree, group 14-12 are considered. The chronic exposure will increase to
9.9% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old, when tea and pineapple are
also assessed (See ``Fenazaquin, Acute and Chronic Aggregate Dietary
(Food and Drinking Water) Exposure and Risk Assessments to Support Use
of the Insecticide (Without Section 3 Registration) on Imported Tea and
Imported Pineapple'' in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0029). Based
on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of fenazaquin is not
expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Because there
is no dermal endpoint and no potential short-term residential
inhalation or incidental oral exposure to fenazaquin, a short-term risk
is not expected.
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). Because there is no dermal endpoint and no potential
intermediate-term inhalation or oral residential exposure to
fenazaquin, an intermediate-term risk is not expected.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, fenazaquin is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to fenazaquin residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology, high-performance liquid
chromatography with positive ion electrospray ionization with tandem
mass spectrometric detection (LC-MS/MS), is available to enforce the
tolerance expression. However, for tea, residues were analyzed using
gas chromatography with mass spectrometry (GC-MS) in selected ion
monitoring mode.
The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established MRLs for fenazaquin in/on hop, dried
cones; nuts, tree, group 14-12; pineapple; or tea, dried.
C. Response to Comments
The majority of comments submitted to this docket concerned
chemicals or actions not associated with the fenazaquin petitions. One
comment was submitted by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) in
response to the Notice of Filing for PP 6F8442 and PP 5F8429 and was
primarily concerned about environmental risks and Agency compliance
with any relevant obligations under the Endangered Species Act. This
comment is not relevant to the Agency's evaluation of safety of the
fenazaquin tolerances; section 408 of the FFDCA focuses on potential
harms to human health, not effects on the environment.
The three remaining comments were anonymous public comments
submitted in response to the Notice of Filing, which stated, in part,
to ``Deny this petition. It is harmful and is a toxic chemical'';
``there is insufficient information on all facets of hazard from this
toxic chemical''; and ``We, as Americans, do not need or want any more
EPA regulations.'' The Agency recognizes that some individuals believe
that pesticides should be banned on agricultural crops; however, these
comments provide no supporting information upon which to evaluate the
safety of pesticide. The existing legal framework provided by section
408 of the FFDCA states that tolerances may be set when persons seeking
such tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that the pesticide
meets the safety standard imposed by that statute. The Agency has
evaluated the available information and determined that these
tolerances are safe.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of fenazaquin,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on hop, dried cones at
30 ppm; nuts, tree, group 14-12 at 0.02 ppm; pineapple at 0.20 ppm; and
tea, dried at 9.0 ppm. In addition, the Agency is removing the separate
tolerance for almonds as it is unnecessary because almond is a
commodity covered by the crop group tolerances for nuts, tree, group
14-12.
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
[[Page 24071]]
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: May 1, 2017.
Michael Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
0
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. 180.632, amend the table in paragraph (a) as follows:
0
a. Remove the entry for ``Almond''.
0
b. Add alphabetically the entries for ``hop, dried cones''; ``nuts,
tree, group 14-12''; ``pineapple''; and ``tea, dried''.
0
c. Add a footnote at the end of the table.
The additions read as follows:
Sec. 180.632 Fenazaquin; Tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Hop, dried cones............................................. 30.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Pineapple \1\................................................ 0.20
Nuts, Tree, Group 14-12...................................... 0.02
Tea, dried \1\............................................... 9.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no U.S. registrations as of May 25, 2017 for use on
pineapple and tea.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-10751 Filed 5-24-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P