Tolpyralate; Pesticide Tolerances, 34877-34882 [2017-15717]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers,
food processors, food handlers, and food
retailers, not States or tribes, nor does
this action alter the relationships or
distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress
in the preemption provisions of FFDCA
section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency
has determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on States
or tribal governments, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this action. In addition, this action
does not impose any enforceable duty or
contain any unfunded mandate as
described under Title II of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C.
1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
17:07 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.663, revise the entry for
‘‘Hop, dried cones’’ in the table in
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
■
§ 180.663 Ametoctradin; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
Parts
per
million
Commodity
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
*
*
*
*
Hop, dried cones ........................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
100
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–15762 Filed 7–26–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2015–0405; FRL–9964–15]
Tolpyralate; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of tolpyralate in
or on field corn, popcorn, and sweet
corn. ISK Biosciences Corporation
requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
SUMMARY:
This regulation is effective July
27, 2017. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
September 25, 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–2015–0405, 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:
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Dated: June 22, 2017.
Michael Goodis,
Director Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
34877
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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–2015–0405 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
34878
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before September 25, 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–
2015–0405, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of August 26,
2015 (80 FR 51759) (FRL–9931–74),
EPA issued a document pursuant to
FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 5F8359) by ISK
Biosciences, Corporation, 7470 Auburn
Rd., Suite A, Concord, OH 44077. The
petition requested that 40 CFR part 180
be amended by establishing tolerances
for residues of the herbicide, tolpyralate,
1-[[1-ethyl-4-[3-(2-methoxyethoxy)-2methyl-4-(methylsulfonyl)benzoyl]-1Hpyrazol-5-yl]oxy]ethyl methyl
carbonate, including its metabolite MT–
2153, in or on the raw agricultural
commodities of corn that include field
corn (corn, field, grain; corn, field,
forage; and corn, field, stover); sweet
corn (corn, sweet, kernel + cob with
husks removed; corn, sweet, forage; and
corn, sweet, stover); and popcorn (corn,
pop, grain and corn, pop, stover) at 0.01
parts per million (ppm). That document
referenced a summary of the petition
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
prepared by ISK Biosciences,
Corporation the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
determines that the tolerance is ‘‘safe.’’
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information.’’ This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure
of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a
tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. . . .’’
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure for tolpyralate
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with tolpyralate 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 effects in the tolpyralate hazard
database are similar to those seen with
other hydroxyphenylpyruvate
dioxygenase (HPPD) inhibiting
chemicals, including eye opacity and
developmental skeletal defects. The
major target organs identified were the
eyes, kidney, liver, thyroid and
developing skeleton. Other effects
included pancreatic acinar cell single
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
cell necrosis, gall bladder calculi, fur
loss and/or tactile hair loss, and
decreased body weights. No systemic
toxicity was observed following a 28day dermal exposure in the rat.
Neurotoxicity was not observed in the
acute or subchronic neurotoxicity
studies in the rat. There was no
indication of neurotoxicity to the fetus
in developmental studies or during
early postnatal development in a rat
reproductive toxicity study. However,
with chronic exposure, rats and mice
showed effects on the nervous system
that were indicative of a temporallydependent response for neurotoxicity.
Similar findings were not seen in the
one-year dog study.
Developmental toxicity studies in the
rat and rabbit showed that the main
effects on fetuses in both species were
skeletal variations that are consistent
with those observed from exposure to
other HPPD inhibitors. These skeletal
effects are considered to be evidence of
increased quantitative and qualitative
prenatal susceptibility. No immunotoxic
potential was observed in a mouse
immunotoxicity study; however, in the
dog, inflammation associated with
hyperostosis and lymph node
hyperplasia in males was observed.
In the rat, an increase in the incidence
of squamous cell carcinomas of the eye
was observed. The increase in this
tumor type is considered to be related
to the eye opacities typically observed
with compounds producing HPPD
inhibition. The Agency has determined
that tolpyralate shows ‘‘suggestive
evidence of carcinogenicity to humans’’
based on an increase in the incidence of
squamous cell carcinoma of the eye in
male rats in the rat carcinogenicity
study. There was no evidence of
carcinogenicity in female rats or in the
mouse. Most genotoxicity studies did
not show evidence of mutagenicity or
clastogenicity. A mouse lymphoma cell
gene mutation assay showed a dosedependent, reproducible increase in
mutant colonies, but the results of this
study are considered inconclusive due
to the insolubility of the test compound.
However, all other genotoxicity studies,
including an in vivo mouse
micronucleus assay, were negative.
Therefore, when considered as a whole,
the available mutagenicity and
clastogenicity studies did not indicate
genotoxic potential.
The Agency concluded that the eye
tumors resulted from long-term
exposure to increased blood tyrosine
levels as a result of HPPD inhibition.
The eye is a target organ for HPPD
inhibitors and causes opacities and
keratitis with subchronic or chronic
exposure. Eye tumors have been
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
reported in male rats following chronic
exposure to some other HPPD
inhibitors. Since the development of the
eye tumors in the rat is considered to be
dependent upon ocular toxicity, and not
to a linear (non-threshold), genotoxic
mechanism, tumors will not develop at
doses that are protective of eye toxicity.
Eye effects from exposure to tolpyralate
were observed at the LOAEL in males in
the rat chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity
study but not at the NOAEL. The
NOAEL from this study is therefore
considered protective of this tumor type
and was used as the basis of the chronic
reference dose. Quantification of cancer
risk is not required because the chronic
reference dose, which is protective of
eye toxicity, is considered to be
protective of cancer risk.
The acute toxicity of tolpyralate is
low, and it is not an eye or skin irritant
or a dermal sensitizer.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by tolpyralate as well as
the NOAELs and the LOAELs from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document titled
‘‘Tolpyralate—New Active Ingredient
Human Health Risk Assessment for
Proposed Uses on Sweet Corn, Field
Corn, and Popcorn’’ at page 35 in docket
ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2015–405.
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 (LOC) 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
34879
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.
No adverse effects resulting from a
single exposure and relevant for the
general population were identified for
tolpyralate; therefore, a point of
departure for assessing acute risk for
this population was not established. The
fetal skeletal effects noted above are
suitable for acute assessment of women
of child-bearing age. The no-adverse
effect level (NOAEL) for skeletal
variations in the rabbit developmental
toxicity study is 5 mg/kg body weight
(bw)/day (lowest adverse effect level
(LOAEL) = 50 mg/kg bw/day). Chronic
exposure is being assessed based on the
systemic effects (fur loss; eye opacity;
liver; pancreas; kidney; thyroid and
cerebellar effects) noted in the chronic
oral toxicity study in rats, with a
NOAEL of 0.93 mg/kg bw/day and a
LOAEL of 97/126 (male/female) mg/kg
bw/day. A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for tolpyralate used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR TOLPYRALATE FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Exposure/scenario
Acute dietary (General population including infants and
children).
Acute dietary (Females 13–49
years of age).
Chronic dietary (All populations including infants and
children and females 13–49
years of age).
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).
Point of departure and
uncertainty/safety factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
....................................
....................................
NOAEL = 5 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
NOAEL= 0.925 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Acute RfD = 0.05 mg/
kg/day.
aPAD = 0.05 mg/kg/
day
Chronic RfD = 0.0093
mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.0093 mg/kg/
day
An appropriate endpoint was not identified for this exposure
scenario. An adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure was not identified for the general population.
Developmental toxicity study in the rabbit (gavage; rangefinding and main studies considered together).
Developmental LOAEL = 50 mg/kg/day based an increased
incidence of skeletal abnormalities (range-finding study).
Chronic oral toxicity in the rat (dietary).
LOAEL = 97/126 mg/kg/day based on fur loss, eye opacity/
neovascularization/keratitis, increased relative liver weight,
thyroid
follicular
cell
hypertrophy,
hepatocellular
centrilobular fatty change, increased pancreatic acinar cell
necrosis, renal tubule basophilic change, increased molecular layer vacuolation in the cerebellum (males).
Classification: Suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential in humans, based on squamous cell carcinoma of
the eye in male rats. The chronic RfD is protective of carcinogenicity.
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day =
milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c =
chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population
(intraspecies). DAF = dermal absorption factor.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to tolpyralate, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances. EPA assessed dietary
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
exposures from tolpyralate 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
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
occurring as a result of a 1-day or single
exposure.
Such effects were identified for
tolpyralate. In estimating acute dietary
exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
34880
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
under the Continuing Survey of Food
Intake by Individuals (CSFII) and the
CDC under the National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey/What We
Eat in America (NHANES/WEIA) 2003–
2008. EPA assumed tolerance-level
residues for all commodities and 100%
crop treated. There is no expectation of
finite residues in either livestock
commodities or rotational crops;
therefore, no residues have been entered
for these commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the USDA NHANES/WEIA 2003–
2008. EPA assumed tolerance-level
residues for all commodities and 100%
crop treated.
iii. Cancer. The Agency has
determined that quantification of risk
using a non-linear approach (i.e., RfD),
for tolpyralate will adequately account
for all chronic toxicity, including
carcinogenicity, that could result from
exposure to tolpyralate. As a result, the
chronic dietary exposure assessment is
protective for potential cancer risk, and
a separate cancer exposure assessment
was not conducted.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did
not use anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for tolpyralate. Tolerance level residues
and/or 100% CT were assumed for all
food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water.
The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for tolpyralate in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of tolpyralate.
Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at
https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-scienceand-assessing-pesticide-risks/aboutwater-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
The groundwater value was generated
using the Pesticide Root Zone Model for
Groundwater (PRZM–GW) Model, and
the surface water values were generated
using the Pesticide Root Zone Model
(PRZM5) and the Variable Volume
Water Model (VVWM). The EDWCs of
tolpyralate for acute exposures are
estimated to be 6.75 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 11.53 ppb
for ground water. For chronic exposures
assessments are estimated to be 0.65
ppb for surface water and 10.18 ppb for
ground water. Modeled estimates of
drinking water concentrations were
directly entered into the dietary
exposure model.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
For acute dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration value of 11.53 ppb
was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water.
For chronic dietary risk assessment,
the water concentration of value 10.18
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).
Tolpyralate is not registered for any
specific use patterns that would result
in residential exposure.
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.’’
Although tolpyralate belongs to the
class of chemicals whose mechanism of
toxicity is the inhibition of HPPD, EPA
has not made a common mechanism of
toxicity finding as to tolpyralate and
other HPPD-inhibiting substances.
There are marked differences among
species in the ocular toxicity and other
effects typically associated with
tolpyralate and other substances that the
inhibit HPPD. Ocular effects following
treatment with HPPD-inhibitor
herbicides are seen in the rat but not in
the mouse. Monkeys also seem to be
recalcitrant to the ocular toxicity
induced by HPPD inhibition. One
explanation for this species-specific
response in ocular opacity may be
related to species differences in the
clearance of tyrosine. A metabolic
pathway that involves the liver enzyme
tyrosine aminotransferase (TAT) exists
to remove tyrosine from the blood. In
contrast to rats where ocular toxicity is
observed following exposure to HPPDinhibiting herbicides, mice and humans
are unlikely to achieve the levels of
plasma tyrosine necessary to produce
ocular opacities because the activity of
TAT in these species is much greater
compared to rats.
HPPD inhibitors (e.g., nitisinone) are
used as an effective therapeutic agent to
treat patients suffering from rare genetic
diseases of tyrosine catabolism.
Treatment starts in childhood but is
often sustained throughout patient’s
lifetime. The human experience
indicates that a therapeutic dose (1 mg/
kg/day dose) of nitisinone has an
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
excellent safety record in infants,
children, and adults and that serious
adverse health outcomes have not been
observed in a population followed for
approximately a decade. Rarely, ocular
effects are seen in patients with high
plasma tyrosine levels; however, these
effects are transient and can be readily
reversed upon adherence to a restricted
protein diet. This observation indicates
that an HPPD inhibitor in and of itself
cannot easily overwhelm the tyrosineclearance mechanism in humans.
Based on the available information
about the potential mechanism of
toxicity and the variability of effects
between species, EPA has not assumed,
for purposes of this tolerance action,
that tolpyralate has a common
mechanism of toxicity with other
substances.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
Quantitative and qualitative evidence of
increased susceptibility, as compared to
adults, of fetuses to in utero exposure to
tolpyralate was observed in
developmental toxicity studies in rats
and rabbits. Concern for this evidence is
low because (1) clear NOAELs/LOAELs
were identified for the observed effects;
(2) the relevant developmental effects
were observed at LOAELs that were well
above (10-fold greater) the NOAELs; and
(3) the selected endpoints are protective
of these 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 database for tolpyralate is
considered complete with respect to
FQPA assessment.
ii. There is no concern for
neurotoxicity from single or subchronic
exposures. Although neuropathology
was observed at the LOAELs in the rat
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
and the mouse long-term studies, the
chronic LOAELs were almost 100-fold
greater than the chronic NOAELs. The
POD and endpoint for chronic dietary
exposure are selected from the rat
chronic study. Therefore, the chronic
PAD (cPAD) is protective of potential
neuropathology. It is also protective of
increased susceptibility of offspring for
neurotoxicity in the absence of a
developmental neurotoxicity study,
since neurotoxicity in adult animals was
only observed as an effect following
long-term dosing. There was no
neurotoxicity observed in the database
with exposure up to 90 days, including
no evidence of neurotoxicity in the rat
or rabbit developmental toxicity studies
or the rat reproductive toxicity study.
An additional uncertainty factor to
account for the absence of data or other
data deficiency (10x UFDB) is therefore
not needed to account for this study.
iii. Evidence of quantitative and
qualitative prenatal susceptibility was
observed in the rat and rabbit
developmental toxicity studies based on
findings of fetal skeletal abnormalities at
doses below those causing maternal
toxicity. However, clear NOAELs and
LOAELs were identified in both species
and there are no residual uncertainties
regarding the points of departure PODs
or the endpoints of concern.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100% CT and
tolerance-level residues. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to tolpyralate in
drinking water. These assessments will
not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by tolpyralate.
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
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
tolpyralate will occupy 1.3% of the
aPAD for females of child-bearing age
(13–49 years old), the only population
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
relevant for assessing acute exposure to
tolpyralate.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to tolpyralate
from food and water will utilize 6.2% of
the cPAD for all infants (<1 year-old),
the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. There are no
residential uses for tolpyralate.
3. Short-term risk. A short-term
adverse effect was identified; however,
tolpyralate is not registered for any use
patterns that would result in short-term
residential exposure. Short-term risk is
assessed based on short-term residential
exposure plus chronic dietary exposure.
Because there is no short-term
residential exposure and chronic dietary
exposure has already been assessed
under the appropriately protective
cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess short-term risk),
no further assessment of short-term risk
is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating short-term risk for
tolpyralate.
4. Intermediate-term risk. An
intermediate-term adverse effect was
identified; however, tolpyralate is not
registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on intermediateterm residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure
and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for
tolpyralate.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the discussion in
Unit III.A., the chronic dietary exposure
assessment is protective for potential
cancer risk.
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 tolpyralate
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(ISK Biosciences Method JSM0433) for
plant commodities is a LC–MS/MS
method that can be used to analyze for
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34881
parent tolpyralate and the metabolite
MT–2153 concurrently. It has been
developed and independently validated,
and is available to enforce the tolerance
expression. For all matrices and
analytes, the level of quantification
(LOQ), defined as the lowest level of
method validation (LLMV) or lowest
spiking level where acceptable precision
and accuracy data were obtained, was
determined to be 0.01 ppm. The limit of
detection (LOD) was 0.004 ppm.
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 a MRL for tolpyralate.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of the herbicide tolpyralate
in or on field corn (corn, field, grain;
corn, field, forage; and corn, field,
stover), sweet corn (corn, sweet, kernel
+ cob with husks removed; corn, sweet,
forage; and corn, sweet, stover), and
popcorn (corn, pop, grain and corn, pop,
stover) at 0.01 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes tolerances
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action
has been exempted from review under
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
34882
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 143 / Thursday, July 27, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
Executive Order 12866, this action is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This action does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers,
food processors, food handlers, and food
retailers, not States or tribes, nor does
this action alter the relationships or
distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress
in the preemption provisions of FFDCA
section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency
has determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on States
or tribal governments, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:07 Jul 26, 2017
Jkt 241001
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: July 11, 2017.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Add § 180.696 to subpart C to read
as follows:
■
§ 180.696 Tolpyralate; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of tolpyralate,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities in
the table below. Compliance with the
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Parts per
million
Corn, field, forage .......................
Corn, field, grain .........................
Corn, field, stover .......................
Corn, pop, grain ..........................
Corn, pop, stover ........................
Corn, sweet, forage ....................
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob
with husks removed ................
Corn, sweet, stover ....................
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional
registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues.
[Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2017–15717 Filed 7–26–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
46 CFR Part 91
CFR Correction
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Frm 00048
Commodity
Inspection and Certification
PART 180—[AMENDED]
PO 00000
tolerance levels specified below is to be
determined by measuring only
tolpyralate, 1-[[1-ethyl-4-[3-(2methoxyethoxy)-2-methyl-4(methylsulfonyl)benzoyl]-1H-pyrazol-5yl]oxy]ethyl methyl carbonate, in or on
the commodity.
In Title 46 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, parts 90 to 139, revised as
of October 1, 2016, on page 24, in
§ 91.40–3, in paragraph (a)(2), Table
91.40–3(a) is removed and Table 91.40–
3(b) is reinstated to read as follows:
■
§ 91.40–3 Drydock examination, internal
structural examination, cargo tank internal
examination, and underwater survey
intervals.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 143 (Thursday, July 27, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34877-34882]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15717]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0405; FRL-9964-15]
Tolpyralate; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
tolpyralate in or on field corn, popcorn, and sweet corn. ISK
Biosciences Corporation requested these tolerances under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective July 27, 2017. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before September 25, 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-2015-0405, 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-2015-0405 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All
[[Page 34878]]
objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or before September 25, 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-2015-0405, by one of
the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of August 26, 2015 (80 FR 51759) (FRL-9931-
74), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
5F8359) by ISK Biosciences, Corporation, 7470 Auburn Rd., Suite A,
Concord, OH 44077. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be
amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide,
tolpyralate, 1-[[1-ethyl-4-[3-(2-methoxyethoxy)-2-methyl-4-
(methylsulfonyl)benzoyl]-1H-pyrazol-5-yl]oxy]ethyl methyl carbonate,
including its metabolite MT-2153, in or on the raw agricultural
commodities of corn that include field corn (corn, field, grain; corn,
field, forage; and corn, field, stover); sweet corn (corn, sweet,
kernel + cob with husks removed; corn, sweet, forage; and corn, sweet,
stover); and popcorn (corn, pop, grain and corn, pop, stover) at 0.01
parts per million (ppm). That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by ISK Biosciences, Corporation the registrant, which
is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for tolpyralate including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with tolpyralate 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 effects in the tolpyralate hazard database are similar to those
seen with other hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) inhibiting
chemicals, including eye opacity and developmental skeletal defects.
The major target organs identified were the eyes, kidney, liver,
thyroid and developing skeleton. Other effects included pancreatic
acinar cell single cell necrosis, gall bladder calculi, fur loss and/or
tactile hair loss, and decreased body weights. No systemic toxicity was
observed following a 28-day dermal exposure in the rat.
Neurotoxicity was not observed in the acute or subchronic
neurotoxicity studies in the rat. There was no indication of
neurotoxicity to the fetus in developmental studies or during early
postnatal development in a rat reproductive toxicity study. However,
with chronic exposure, rats and mice showed effects on the nervous
system that were indicative of a temporally-dependent response for
neurotoxicity. Similar findings were not seen in the one-year dog
study.
Developmental toxicity studies in the rat and rabbit showed that
the main effects on fetuses in both species were skeletal variations
that are consistent with those observed from exposure to other HPPD
inhibitors. These skeletal effects are considered to be evidence of
increased quantitative and qualitative prenatal susceptibility. No
immunotoxic potential was observed in a mouse immunotoxicity study;
however, in the dog, inflammation associated with hyperostosis and
lymph node hyperplasia in males was observed.
In the rat, an increase in the incidence of squamous cell
carcinomas of the eye was observed. The increase in this tumor type is
considered to be related to the eye opacities typically observed with
compounds producing HPPD inhibition. The Agency has determined that
tolpyralate shows ``suggestive evidence of carcinogenicity to humans''
based on an increase in the incidence of squamous cell carcinoma of the
eye in male rats in the rat carcinogenicity study. There was no
evidence of carcinogenicity in female rats or in the mouse. Most
genotoxicity studies did not show evidence of mutagenicity or
clastogenicity. A mouse lymphoma cell gene mutation assay showed a
dose-dependent, reproducible increase in mutant colonies, but the
results of this study are considered inconclusive due to the
insolubility of the test compound. However, all other genotoxicity
studies, including an in vivo mouse micronucleus assay, were negative.
Therefore, when considered as a whole, the available mutagenicity and
clastogenicity studies did not indicate genotoxic potential.
The Agency concluded that the eye tumors resulted from long-term
exposure to increased blood tyrosine levels as a result of HPPD
inhibition. The eye is a target organ for HPPD inhibitors and causes
opacities and keratitis with subchronic or chronic exposure. Eye tumors
have been
[[Page 34879]]
reported in male rats following chronic exposure to some other HPPD
inhibitors. Since the development of the eye tumors in the rat is
considered to be dependent upon ocular toxicity, and not to a linear
(non-threshold), genotoxic mechanism, tumors will not develop at doses
that are protective of eye toxicity. Eye effects from exposure to
tolpyralate were observed at the LOAEL in males in the rat chronic
toxicity/carcinogenicity study but not at the NOAEL. The NOAEL from
this study is therefore considered protective of this tumor type and
was used as the basis of the chronic reference dose. Quantification of
cancer risk is not required because the chronic reference dose, which
is protective of eye toxicity, is considered to be protective of cancer
risk.
The acute toxicity of tolpyralate is low, and it is not an eye or
skin irritant or a dermal sensitizer.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by tolpyralate as well as the NOAELs and the
LOAELs from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document titled ``Tolpyralate--New Active
Ingredient Human Health Risk Assessment for Proposed Uses on Sweet
Corn, Field Corn, and Popcorn'' at page 35 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2015-405.
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 (LOC) 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.
No adverse effects resulting from a single exposure and relevant
for the general population were identified for tolpyralate; therefore,
a point of departure for assessing acute risk for this population was
not established. The fetal skeletal effects noted above are suitable
for acute assessment of women of child-bearing age. The no-adverse
effect level (NOAEL) for skeletal variations in the rabbit
developmental toxicity study is 5 mg/kg body weight (bw)/day (lowest
adverse effect level (LOAEL) = 50 mg/kg bw/day). Chronic exposure is
being assessed based on the systemic effects (fur loss; eye opacity;
liver; pancreas; kidney; thyroid and cerebellar effects) noted in the
chronic oral toxicity study in rats, with a NOAEL of 0.93 mg/kg bw/day
and a LOAEL of 97/126 (male/female) mg/kg bw/day. A summary of the
toxicological endpoints for tolpyralate used for human risk assessment
is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Tolpyralate for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure
Exposure/scenario and uncertainty/ RfD, PAD, LOC for Study and toxicological effects
safety factors risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (General population .................... ................... An appropriate endpoint was not
including infants and children). identified for this exposure
scenario. An adverse effect
resulting from a single oral
exposure was not identified for
the general population.
Acute dietary (Females 13-49 NOAEL = 5 mg/kg/day. Acute RfD = 0.05 mg/ Developmental toxicity study in
years of age). UFA = 10x........... kg/day. the rabbit (gavage; range-finding
UFH = 10x........... aPAD = 0.05 mg/kg/ and main studies considered
FQPA SF = 1x........ day. together).
Developmental LOAEL = 50 mg/kg/day
based an increased incidence of
skeletal abnormalities (range-
finding study).
Chronic dietary (All populations NOAEL= 0.925 mg/kg/ Chronic RfD = Chronic oral toxicity in the rat
including infants and children day. 0.0093 mg/kg/day. (dietary).
and females 13-49 years of age). UFA = 10x........... cPAD = 0.0093 mg/kg/ LOAEL = 97/126 mg/kg/day based on
UFH = 10x........... day. fur loss, eye opacity/
FQPA SF = 1x........ neovascularization/keratitis,
increased relative liver weight,
thyroid follicular cell
hypertrophy, hepatocellular
centrilobular fatty change,
increased pancreatic acinar cell
necrosis, renal tubule basophilic
change, increased molecular layer
vacuolation in the cerebellum
(males).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: Suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential in humans,
based on squamous cell carcinoma of the eye in male rats. The chronic RfD is
protective of carcinogenicity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level
of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-
level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor.
UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). DAF = dermal
absorption factor.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to tolpyralate, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances. EPA assessed dietary exposures from tolpyralate 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 tolpyralate. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
[[Page 34880]]
under the Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII) and
the CDC under the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey/What
We Eat in America (NHANES/WEIA) 2003-2008. EPA assumed tolerance-level
residues for all commodities and 100% crop treated. There is no
expectation of finite residues in either livestock commodities or
rotational crops; therefore, no residues have been entered for these
commodities.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the USDA NHANES/WEIA
2003-2008. EPA assumed tolerance-level residues for all commodities and
100% crop treated.
iii. Cancer. The Agency has determined that quantification of risk
using a non-linear approach (i.e., RfD), for tolpyralate will
adequately account for all chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity,
that could result from exposure to tolpyralate. As a result, the
chronic dietary exposure assessment is protective for potential cancer
risk, and a separate cancer exposure assessment was not conducted.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for tolpyralate. Tolerance level residues and/or
100% CT were assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water.
The Agency used screening level water exposure models in the
dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for tolpyralate in
drinking water. These simulation models take into account data on the
physical, chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of tolpyralate.
Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in
pesticide exposure assessment can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
The groundwater value was generated using the Pesticide Root Zone
Model for Groundwater (PRZM-GW) Model, and the surface water values
were generated using the Pesticide Root Zone Model (PRZM5) and the
Variable Volume Water Model (VVWM). The EDWCs of tolpyralate for acute
exposures are estimated to be 6.75 parts per billion (ppb) for surface
water and 11.53 ppb for ground water. For chronic exposures assessments
are estimated to be 0.65 ppb for surface water and 10.18 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
11.53 ppb was used to assess the contribution to drinking water.
For chronic dietary risk assessment, the water concentration of
value 10.18 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).
Tolpyralate is not registered for any specific use patterns that
would result in residential exposure.
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.''
Although tolpyralate belongs to the class of chemicals whose
mechanism of toxicity is the inhibition of HPPD, EPA has not made a
common mechanism of toxicity finding as to tolpyralate and other HPPD-
inhibiting substances. There are marked differences among species in
the ocular toxicity and other effects typically associated with
tolpyralate and other substances that the inhibit HPPD. Ocular effects
following treatment with HPPD-inhibitor herbicides are seen in the rat
but not in the mouse. Monkeys also seem to be recalcitrant to the
ocular toxicity induced by HPPD inhibition. One explanation for this
species-specific response in ocular opacity may be related to species
differences in the clearance of tyrosine. A metabolic pathway that
involves the liver enzyme tyrosine aminotransferase (TAT) exists to
remove tyrosine from the blood. In contrast to rats where ocular
toxicity is observed following exposure to HPPD-inhibiting herbicides,
mice and humans are unlikely to achieve the levels of plasma tyrosine
necessary to produce ocular opacities because the activity of TAT in
these species is much greater compared to rats.
HPPD inhibitors (e.g., nitisinone) are used as an effective
therapeutic agent to treat patients suffering from rare genetic
diseases of tyrosine catabolism. Treatment starts in childhood but is
often sustained throughout patient's lifetime. The human experience
indicates that a therapeutic dose (1 mg/kg/day dose) of nitisinone has
an excellent safety record in infants, children, and adults and that
serious adverse health outcomes have not been observed in a population
followed for approximately a decade. Rarely, ocular effects are seen in
patients with high plasma tyrosine levels; however, these effects are
transient and can be readily reversed upon adherence to a restricted
protein diet. This observation indicates that an HPPD inhibitor in and
of itself cannot easily overwhelm the tyrosine-clearance mechanism in
humans.
Based on the available information about the potential mechanism of
toxicity and the variability of effects between species, EPA has not
assumed, for purposes of this tolerance action, that tolpyralate has a
common mechanism of toxicity with other substances.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. Quantitative and qualitative
evidence of increased susceptibility, as compared to adults, of fetuses
to in utero exposure to tolpyralate was observed in developmental
toxicity studies in rats and rabbits. Concern for this evidence is low
because (1) clear NOAELs/LOAELs were identified for the observed
effects; (2) the relevant developmental effects were observed at LOAELs
that were well above (10-fold greater) the NOAELs; and (3) the selected
endpoints are protective of these 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 database for tolpyralate is considered complete with respect
to FQPA assessment.
ii. There is no concern for neurotoxicity from single or subchronic
exposures. Although neuropathology was observed at the LOAELs in the
rat
[[Page 34881]]
and the mouse long-term studies, the chronic LOAELs were almost 100-
fold greater than the chronic NOAELs. The POD and endpoint for chronic
dietary exposure are selected from the rat chronic study. Therefore,
the chronic PAD (cPAD) is protective of potential neuropathology. It is
also protective of increased susceptibility of offspring for
neurotoxicity in the absence of a developmental neurotoxicity study,
since neurotoxicity in adult animals was only observed as an effect
following long-term dosing. There was no neurotoxicity observed in the
database with exposure up to 90 days, including no evidence of
neurotoxicity in the rat or rabbit developmental toxicity studies or
the rat reproductive toxicity study. An additional uncertainty factor
to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency (10x UFDB)
is therefore not needed to account for this study.
iii. Evidence of quantitative and qualitative prenatal
susceptibility was observed in the rat and rabbit developmental
toxicity studies based on findings of fetal skeletal abnormalities at
doses below those causing maternal toxicity. However, clear NOAELs and
LOAELs were identified in both species and there are no residual
uncertainties regarding the points of departure PODs or the endpoints
of concern.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100% CT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used
to assess exposure to tolpyralate in drinking water. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by tolpyralate.
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 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 tolpyralate will occupy 1.3% of the aPAD for females of child-
bearing age (13-49 years old), the only population relevant for
assessing acute exposure to tolpyralate.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
tolpyralate from food and water will utilize 6.2% of the cPAD for all
infants (<1 year-old), the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for tolpyralate.
3. Short-term risk. A short-term adverse effect was identified;
however, tolpyralate is not registered for any use patterns that would
result in short-term residential exposure. Short-term risk is assessed
based on short-term residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure.
Because there is no short-term residential exposure and chronic dietary
exposure has already been assessed under the appropriately protective
cPAD (which is at least as protective as the POD used to assess short-
term risk), no further assessment of short-term risk is necessary, and
EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating short-
term risk for tolpyralate.
4. Intermediate-term risk. An intermediate-term adverse effect was
identified; however, tolpyralate is not registered for any use patterns
that would result in intermediate-term residential exposure.
Intermediate-term risk is assessed based on intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to assess intermediate-term
risk), no further assessment of intermediate-term risk is necessary,
and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating
intermediate-term risk for tolpyralate.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the
discussion in Unit III.A., the chronic dietary exposure assessment is
protective for potential cancer risk.
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 tolpyralate residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (ISK Biosciences Method JSM0433)
for plant commodities is a LC-MS/MS method that can be used to analyze
for parent tolpyralate and the metabolite MT-2153 concurrently. It has
been developed and independently validated, and is available to enforce
the tolerance expression. For all matrices and analytes, the level of
quantification (LOQ), defined as the lowest level of method validation
(LLMV) or lowest spiking level where acceptable precision and accuracy
data were obtained, was determined to be 0.01 ppm. The limit of
detection (LOD) was 0.004 ppm.
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 a MRL for tolpyralate.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of the herbicide
tolpyralate in or on field corn (corn, field, grain; corn, field,
forage; and corn, field, stover), sweet corn (corn, sweet, kernel + cob
with husks removed; corn, sweet, forage; and corn, sweet, stover), and
popcorn (corn, pop, grain and corn, pop, stover) at 0.01 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under
[[Page 34882]]
Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive Order
13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22,
2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997). This action does not contain any information collections subject
to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), nor does it require any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 11, 2017.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, 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. Add Sec. 180.696 to subpart C to read as follows:
Sec. 180.696 Tolpyralate; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of
tolpyralate, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by measuring only tolpyralate, 1-
[[1-ethyl-4-[3-(2-methoxyethoxy)-2-methyl-4-(methylsulfonyl)benzoyl]-
1H-pyrazol-5-yl]oxy]ethyl methyl carbonate, in or on the commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corn, field, forage......................................... 0.01
Corn, field, grain.......................................... 0.01
Corn, field, stover......................................... 0.01
Corn, pop, grain............................................ 0.01
Corn, pop, stover........................................... 0.01
Corn, sweet, forage......................................... 0.01
Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed............. 0.01
Corn, sweet, stover......................................... 0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
(c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2017-15717 Filed 7-26-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P