Benzovindiflupyr; Pesticide Tolerances, 52669-52674 [2017-24109]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
includes owners or operators of title V
sources prior to receiving a title V
operating permit from CT DEEP, as well
as sources not subject to the title V
operating permit program. Therefore,
after December 14, 2017, such owners or
operators of a demo/reno activity in
Connecticut subject to the Asbestos
NESHAP must submit Asbestos
NESHAP notifications required under
Section 61.145(b) to the following
address: Asbestos Demo/Reno
Notifications, U.S. EPA Region 1, 5 Post
Office Square, Mail Code: OES05–4,
Boston, MA 02109–3912. The EPA
believes the effective date of this
notification provides sufficient time for
affected sources that are not subject to
the title V operating permit program, or
are subject to the program but have not
obtained a title V operating permit, to
notify the EPA of future demo/reno
activity in accordance with the Asbestos
NESHAP. As noted throughout this
document, the requirement to notify the
EPA does not apply to sources that have
obtained a title V operating permit
under CT DEEP’s title V operating
permit program, already, or that obtain
a title V operating permit in the future.
Any source that has received a title V
operating permit from CT DEEP will
continue to submit demo/reno
notifications to the State of Connecticut.
III. Do I still need to comply with the
State of Connecticut regulations?
Nothing in this notification or CT
DEEP’s voluntary, partial withdrawal
changes any source’s obligation to
comply with state or local laws. All
sources subject to such laws must still
comply with the state and local
regulations. The Connecticut
Department of Public Health
implements an asbestos program under
the Regulations of Connecticut State
Agencies. Sources that are subject to the
Asbestos NESHAP must also comply
with the Connecticut Department of
Public Health’s asbestos program
regulations. This includes potentially
duplicative notification requirements
for owners or operators of demo/reno
activity subject to the Asbestos
NESHAP, as well as the Connecticut
Department of Public Health’s asbestos
program. Owners or operators of
affected sources should continue to
work with their state or local agencies
to ensure any applicable requirements
are being met. More information on the
Connecticut Department of Public Heath
asbestos program can be accessed online
at www.ct.gov/dph/asbestos.
IV. EPA Action
Based on CT DEEP’s voluntary and
partial withdrawal relating to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:31 Nov 13, 2017
Jkt 244001
implementation and enforcement of the
Asbestos NESHAP, the EPA is issuing
this notification. As noted above, the CT
DEEP will retain its delegation to
implement and enforce the Asbestos
NESHAP for sources that have obtained
a title V operating permit from CT
DEEP, or for sources that receive a title
V operating permit in the future (once
the permit is issued). CT DEEP will
continue to assure compliance with all
applicable CAA Section 112
requirements for all sources that have
title V operating permits or obtain title
V operating permits after the date of this
action. The delegation withdrawal is
effective on December 14, 2017.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 61
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Asbestos, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: This action is issued under the
authority of section 112 of the Clean Air Act,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7412.
Dated: October 25, 2017.
Deborah A. Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA-New
England.
[FR Doc. 2017–24638 Filed 11–13–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–0448; FRL–9967–33]
Benzovindiflupyr; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of
benzovindiflupyr in or on the bulb
onion subgroup 3–07A, the green onion
subgroup 3–07B, and increases an
existing tolerance on sugarcane.
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4) and Syngenta Crop Protection
requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
November 14, 2017. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before January 16, 2018, 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–2016–0448, is
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52669
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/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
E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM
14NOR1
52670
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2016–0448 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before January 16, 2018. 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–
2016–0448, 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 October 18,
2016 (81 FR 71668) (FRL–9952–19),
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 6E8483) by IR–4,
Rutgers, The State University of New
Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite
201–W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The
petition requested that 40 CFR 180.686
be amended by establishing tolerances
for residues of the fungicide
benzovindiflupyr (N-[9(dichloromethylene)-1,2,3,4-tetrahydro1,4-methanonaphthalen-5-yl]-3(difluoromethyl)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazole4-carboxamide) in or on onion, bulb,
subgroup 3–07A at 0.02 parts per
million (ppm), and onion, green,
subgroup 3–07B at 0.4 ppm.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:31 Nov 13, 2017
Jkt 244001
In the Federal Register of July 26,
2017 (82 FR 34664) (FRL–9963–50),
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 6F8499) by
Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O.
Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419. The
petition requested to establish a
tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for
residues of the fungicide
benzovindiflupyr in or on Sugarcane,
cane, at 0.3 ppm.
The documents referenced summaries
of the petitions prepared by Syngenta
Crop Protection, LLC, the registrant,
which are available in the dockets EPA–
HQ–OPP–2016–0448 and EPA–HQ–
OPP–2016–0752 at https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to either
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 benzovindiflupyr
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with benzovindiflupyr
follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 rat is the most sensitive species
tested, and the target organs of
benzovindiflupyr are the liver, thyroid,
and kidneys. Hepatotoxicity was
manifested as changes in liver weights,
liver hypertrophy, and decreased
triglycerides. The kidney effects were
tubular cell pigment deposits, changes
in the tubular basophilia, and increased
urea. Enlargement and focal c-cell
hyperplasia of the thyroid were
observed. An increased incidence of cell
hypertrophy in the pituitary pars
distalis was noted in the F1 generation
males and females in the 2-generation
reproductive toxicity rat study. Mouse
studies revealed distended large
intestines, soft feces and hyperplasia of
the colon and caecum. Indications of
general malaise including decreased
body weight and food consumption,
decreased activity, decreased grip
strength, piloerection, decreased
response to stimulus, hunched posture,
gait changes and/or ataxia were reported
in the rat and mouse studies. In several
studies, females tended to be more
sensitive than males and effects were
generally seen at lower doses with
gavage dosing than with dietary dosing.
There are no concerns for
developmental or reproductive toxicity
following benzovindiflupyr exposure.
Decreased fetal weight and ossification
in the rat developmental toxicity studies
occurred at maternally toxic doses.
There were no maternal or fetal adverse
effects in the rabbit developmental
study. In rat reproduction studies,
offspring effects (decreased body
weight, liver and pituitary effects)
occurred at doses higher than those
causing parental effects; thus, there was
no quantitative increase in sensitivity in
rat pups. There were no single-dose
developmental effects identified in the
developmental toxicity studies in rats or
rabbits. Although decreases in growing
follicle counts were noted in the 2generation reproduction toxicity study,
this effect did not result in reduced
fertility in the rat. Furthermore, the
antral follicle counts at a later stage in
development were not decreased, so the
decreased growing follicle count effect
is not considered adverse.
No evidence of specific neurotoxicity
was observed in the acute oral (gavage)
and sub-chronic oral (dietary)
neurotoxicity (ACN and SCN) studies in
rats, conducted on the benzovindiflupyr
technical product. Although
E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM
14NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
benzovindiflupyr caused decreased
activity and decreased grip strength in
the neurotoxicity studies, there was no
supportive neuro-histopathology in any
study to indicate a specific neurotoxic
effect.
The mouse immunotoxicity study was
negative by the T-cell Dependent
Antigen Response (TDAR) assay in the
mouse.
No systemic effects were noted at the
limit dose of 1,000 milligrams/kilogram/
day (mg/kg/day) in the 28-day dermal
rat study.
The Agency classified
benzovindiflupyr as showing
‘‘Suggestive Evidence of Carcinogenic
Potential’’ based on the presence of
granular cell tumors of the brain in male
rats only at the highest dose tested. The
Agency concluded that a non-genotoxic
mode of action for thyroid tumors
observed in male rats has been
established as a result of upregulation of
uridine diphosphate
glucuronyltransferase (UDPGT),
increased clearance of T3 and T4
hormones, and increased TSH levels,
resulting in increased thyroid cell
proliferation, which progress to form
thyroid tumors. There was no evidence
of carcinogenicity in female rats or in
male or female mice. In addition, there
is no concern for mutagenicity. The
Agency has determined that using a
non-linear approach (i.e., RfD; reference
dose) will adequately account for all
chronic toxicity, including
carcinogenicity, that could result from
exposure to benzovindiflupyr.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by benzovindiflupyr as
well as the no-observed-adverse-effectlevel (NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in the document
titled ‘‘Benzovindiflupyr. Human Health
Risk Assessment for the Proposed Use
on Onion, Bulb Subgroup 3–07A; Onion,
Green, Subgroup 3–07B; and
Sugarcane’’ on pages 32–38 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–0448.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:31 Nov 13, 2017
Jkt 244001
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 benzovindiflupyr used for
human risk assessment is discussed in
Unit III.B. of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of October 2, 2015
(80 FR 59627) (FRL–9933–03).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to benzovindiflupyr, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing benzovindiflupyr tolerances in
40 CFR 180.686. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from benzovindiflupyr 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
benzovindiflupyr. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used 2003–2008
food consumption information from the
U.S. Department of Agriculture’s
(USDA’s) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA assumed 100
percent crop treated (PCT) and
tolerance-level residues.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used 2003–2008 food consumption
data from the USDA’s NHANES/
WWEIA. As to residue levels in food,
EPA assumed 100 PCT and tolerancelevel residues.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that a nonlinear RfD
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52671
approach adequately accounts for all
chronic toxicity, including
carcinogenicity, that could result from
exposure to benzovindiflupyr; therefore,
a separate dietary cancer risk
assessment was not performed.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue or PCT information
in the dietary assessment for
benzovindiflupyr. Tolerance-level
residues and 100 PCT were assumed for
all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening-level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for benzovindiflupyr in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
benzovindiflupyr. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/
pesticide-science-and-assessingpesticide-risks/about-water-exposuremodels-used-pesticide.
Based on the Surface Water
Concentration Calculator (SWCC) model
and the Pesticide Root Zone Model
Ground Water (PRZM–GW) model, the
estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) of benzovindiflupyr for acute
exposures are estimated to be 8.41 parts
per billion (ppb) for surface water and
0.14 ppb for ground water and for
chronic exposures are estimated to be
5.41 ppb for surface water and 0.14 ppb
for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For the
acute dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value of 8.41 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For the chronic dietary
risk assessment, the water concentration
of value 5.41 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).
Benzovindiflupyr is currently
registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures:
Turf and ornamentals. EPA assessed
residential exposure using the following
assumptions: For handlers, exposure is
expected as a result of application to
turf and ornamentals. Post-application
exposure is also expected as a result of
being in an environment that has been
previously treated with
benzovindiflupyr. Both handler and
E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM
14NOR1
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
52672
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
post-application exposure is short-term
in duration; there are no intermediateor long term-exposures expected from
the residential uses of benzovindiflupyr.
Only residential handler inhalation and
post-application incidental oral
exposure scenarios have been
quantitatively assessed since no dermal
hazard was identified. Residential
handler short-term inhalation MOEs are
well above the LOC of 100 for all
scenarios assessed and are not of
concern (inhalation MOEs are
≥180,000). Residential post-application
(incidental oral) MOEs for children
ranged from 8,000 to 3,600,000 on the
day of application, using default input
values, and are not of concern (LOC =
100).
The residential scenarios used for the
benzovindiflupyr aggregate assessments
were as follows: Adults: Inhalation
exposures from treating ornamentals
with a manually pressurized handwand
or backpack sprayer; Children 1 to <2
years old: Post-application hand-tomouth exposures from treated turf.
These scenarios resulted in the highest
residential exposures and are
considered protective of other exposure
scenarios.
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.’’
EPA has not found benzovindiflupyr
to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and
benzovindiflupyr does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that benzovindiflupyr does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity
with other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at https://
www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/cumulativeassessment-risk-pesticides.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:31 Nov 13, 2017
Jkt 244001
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There was no evidence of quantitative
or qualitative susceptibility in fetuses or
offspring in the rat and rabbit
developmental studies or in the 2generation rat reproduction study.
Benzovindiflupyr produced effects in
rat fetuses (i.e., decreased fetal weight
and ossification) in developmental
toxicity studies at maternally toxic
doses. In the rabbit developmental
study, there were no adverse effects in
either the does or the fetuses at the
highest dose tested. In reproduction
studies, offspring effects occurred at
doses higher than the doses causing
parental effects; thus, there was no
quantitative increase in sensitivity in rat
pups. The LOAELs and NOAELs for the
rat developmental and rat reproduction
studies were clearly defined.
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
benzovindiflupyr is complete.
ii. There is no indication that
benzovindiflupyr is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
benzovindiflupyr 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
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
used to assess exposure to
benzovindiflupyr in drinking water.
EPA used similarly conservative
assumptions to assess post-application
exposure of children as well as
incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by benzovindiflupyr.
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
benzovindiflupyr will occupy 43% of
the aPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to
benzovindiflupyr from food and water
will utilize 19% of the cPAD for
children 1–2 years old, the population
group receiving the greatest exposure.
Based on the explanation in Unit
III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of benzovindiflupyr 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).
Benzovindiflupyr is currently
registered for uses that could result in
short-term residential exposure, and the
Agency has determined that it is
appropriate to aggregate chronic
exposure through food and water with
short-term residential exposures to
benzovindiflupyr.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures result in aggregate
MOEs of 2100 for adults and 510 for
children. Because EPA’s level of
concern for benzovindiflupyr is a MOE
E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM
14NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
of 100 or below, these MOEs are not of
concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect
was identified; however,
benzovindiflupyr is not registered for
any use patterns that would result in
intermediate-term residential exposure.
Intermediate-term risk is assessed based
on intermediate-term residential
exposure plus chronic dietary exposure.
Because there is no intermediate-term
residential exposure and chronic dietary
exposure has already been assessed
under the appropriately protective
cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediateterm risk), no further assessment of
intermediate-term risk is necessary, and
EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk
assessment for evaluating intermediateterm risk for benzovindiflupyr.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the discussion in
Unit III.A., EPA considers the chronic
aggregate risk assessment to be
protective of any aggregate cancer risk.
As there is no chronic risk of concern,
EPA does not expect any cancer risk to
the U.S. population from aggregate
exposure to benzovindiflupyr.
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
benzovindiflupyr residues.
IV. Other Considerations
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An adequate analytical method is
available to enforce the proposed
tolerances for benzovindiflupyr in plant
and livestock commodities. A Quick,
Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged, and Safe
(QuEChERS) multi-residue method
(EN15662:2009) was developed for the
determination of residues of
benzovindiflupyr via liquid
chromatography-mass spectrometry/
mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS).
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:31 Nov 13, 2017
Jkt 244001
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established any
MRLs for benzovindiflupyr.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of benzovindiflupyr,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on onion, bulb,
subgroup 3–07A at 0.02 ppm; onion,
green, subgroup 3–07B at 0.40 ppm; and
the existing ‘‘sugarcane, cane’’ tolerance
is increased from 0.04 ppm to 0.30 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes tolerances
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this action is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This action does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52673
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: October 12, 2017.
Michael L. Goodis,
Director Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM
14NOR1
52674
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
did receive a relevant adverse comment
on the proposed update, and is therefore
■ 1. The authority citation for part 180
withdrawing the direct final rule and
continues to read as follows:
will instead proceed with a final rule
based on the proposed rule after
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
considering all public comments.
■ 2. In § 180.686, amend the table in
DATES: Effective November 14, 2017 the
paragraph (a) by:
direct final rule published in the
■ i. Adding alphabetically the
commodities ‘‘Onion, bulb, subgroup 3– Federal Register of August 17, 2017 (82
07A’’, ‘‘Onion, green, subgroup 3–07B’’, FR 39038) (FRL–9964–77) is withdrawn.
and
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
■ ii. Revising the commodity
technical information contact:
‘‘Sugarcane, cane’’.
Stephanie Griffin, Toxics Release
The additions and revisions read as
Inventory Program Division (7410M),
follows:
Office of Pollution Prevention and
§ 180.686 Benzovindiflupyr; tolerances for Toxics, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
residues.
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
(a) * * *
number: (202) 564–1463; email address:
griffin.stephanie@epa.gov.
Parts
Commodity
per
For general information contact: The
million
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Information Center;
telephone number: (800) 424–9346, TDD
*
*
*
*
*
Onion, bulb, subgroup 3–07A ......
0.02 (800) 553–7672; Web site: https://
Onion, green, subgroup 3–07B ....
0.40 www.epa.gov/home/epa-hotlines.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
*
*
*
*
Sugarcane, cane ..........................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.30
A list of potentially affected entities is
provided in the Federal Register of
August 17, 2017. If you have questions
regarding the applicability of this action
to a particular entity, consult the
technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–24109 Filed 11–13–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
II. What rule is being withdrawn?
40 CFR Part 372
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2017–0197; FRL–9968–26]
RIN 2070–AK32
Community Right-to-Know; Adopting
2017 North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) Codes
for Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
Reporting; Withdrawal
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule; withdrawal.
AGENCY:
In the Federal Register of
August 17, 2017, EPA published both a
direct final rule and a proposed rule to
update the list of NAICS codes subject
to reporting under the TRI to reflect the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) 2017 NAICS code revision. As
noted in the direct final rule, if EPA
received relevant adverse comment on
the proposed update, the Agency would
publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register
informing the public that the direct final
action will not take effect. The Agency
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:31 Nov 13, 2017
Jkt 244001
I. Does this action apply to me?
In the August 17, 2017 Federal
Register, EPA published both a direct
final rule (see 82 FR 39038) and a
proposed rule (see 82 FR 39101)
pursuant to sections 313(g)(1) and 328
of the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA)
for the purpose of updating the list of
NAICS codes subject to TRI reporting
under EPCRA section 313 to include
OMB’s revised 2017 NAICS codes. The
action would have also modified the list
of relevant exceptions and limitations to
the covered NAICS codes included in
the CFR for TRI reporting purposes.
Since the direct final rule and
proposed rule’s publication, EPA
received a public comment supporting
the overall update, but noting that the
direct final rule inadvertently omitted
one of the covered NAICS codes
updated by OMB. As a result of this
omission, EPA is withdrawing the direct
final rule published in the Federal
Register on August 17, 2017, and will
instead proceed with a final rule based
on the proposed rule after considering
(and responding to) all public comments
received.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
III. How do I access the docket?
To access the docket, please go to
https://www.regulations.gov and follow
the online instructions using the docket
identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
OPPT–2017–0197. Additional
information about the Docket Facility is
also provided under ADDRESSES in the
August 17, 2017 Federal Register
document. If you have questions,
consult the technical person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
IV. Good Cause Finding
EPA finds that there is ‘‘good cause’’
under the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B)) to
withdraw the direct final rule discussed
in this document without prior notice
and comment. Alongside the direct final
rule, EPA published an identical
proposed rule and gave notice in the
Federal Register that the direct final
rule would be withdrawn if the Agency
received adverse comment.
For this document, notice and
comment is impracticable and
unnecessary because EPA is under a
time limit to publish this withdrawal
before the direct final rule is to take
effect to limit confusion among Federal
agencies and the regulated community.
As such, EPA has determined that this
document is not subject to the 30-day
delay of effective date generally
required by 5 U.S.C. 553(d). This
withdrawal must become effective prior
to the effective date of the direct final
rule being withdrawn.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This document withdraws regulatory
requirements that have not gone into
effect. As such, the Agency has
determined that this withdrawal will
not have any adverse impacts, economic
or otherwise. The statutory and
Executive Order review requirements
applicable to the direct final rule being
withdrawn were discussed in the
August 17, 2017 Federal Register
document. Those review requirements
do not apply to this action because it is
a withdrawal and does not contain any
new or amended requirements.
VI. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
Pursuant to the CRA (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). Section 808 of the CRA allows
E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM
14NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 14, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52669-52674]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24109]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0448; FRL-9967-33]
Benzovindiflupyr; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
benzovindiflupyr in or on the bulb onion subgroup 3-07A, the green
onion subgroup 3-07B, and increases an existing tolerance on sugarcane.
Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) and Syngenta Crop
Protection requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective November 14, 2017. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before January 16, 2018,
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-2016-0448, 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
[[Page 52670]]
proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2016-0448 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or before January 16, 2018. 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-2016-0448, 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 October 18, 2016 (81 FR 71668) (FRL-
9952-19), 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
6E8483) by IR-4, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 500
College Road East, Suite 201-W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.686 be amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the fungicide benzovindiflupyr (N-[9-(dichloromethylene)-
1,2,3,4-tetrahydro-1,4-methanonaphthalen-5-yl]-3-(difluoromethyl)-1-
methyl-1H-pyrazole-4-carboxamide) in or on onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A
at 0.02 parts per million (ppm), and onion, green, subgroup 3-07B at
0.4 ppm.
In the Federal Register of July 26, 2017 (82 FR 34664) (FRL-9963-
50), 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
6F8499) by Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro,
NC 27419. The petition requested to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR
part 180 for residues of the fungicide benzovindiflupyr in or on
Sugarcane, cane, at 0.3 ppm.
The documents referenced summaries of the petitions prepared by
Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, the registrant, which are available in
the dockets EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0448 and EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0752 at https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to
either 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 benzovindiflupyr including
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with
benzovindiflupyr 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 rat is the most sensitive species tested, and the target organs
of benzovindiflupyr are the liver, thyroid, and kidneys. Hepatotoxicity
was manifested as changes in liver weights, liver hypertrophy, and
decreased triglycerides. The kidney effects were tubular cell pigment
deposits, changes in the tubular basophilia, and increased urea.
Enlargement and focal c-cell hyperplasia of the thyroid were observed.
An increased incidence of cell hypertrophy in the pituitary pars
distalis was noted in the F1 generation males and females in the 2-
generation reproductive toxicity rat study. Mouse studies revealed
distended large intestines, soft feces and hyperplasia of the colon and
caecum. Indications of general malaise including decreased body weight
and food consumption, decreased activity, decreased grip strength,
piloerection, decreased response to stimulus, hunched posture, gait
changes and/or ataxia were reported in the rat and mouse studies. In
several studies, females tended to be more sensitive than males and
effects were generally seen at lower doses with gavage dosing than with
dietary dosing.
There are no concerns for developmental or reproductive toxicity
following benzovindiflupyr exposure. Decreased fetal weight and
ossification in the rat developmental toxicity studies occurred at
maternally toxic doses. There were no maternal or fetal adverse effects
in the rabbit developmental study. In rat reproduction studies,
offspring effects (decreased body weight, liver and pituitary effects)
occurred at doses higher than those causing parental effects; thus,
there was no quantitative increase in sensitivity in rat pups. There
were no single-dose developmental effects identified in the
developmental toxicity studies in rats or rabbits. Although decreases
in growing follicle counts were noted in the 2-generation reproduction
toxicity study, this effect did not result in reduced fertility in the
rat. Furthermore, the antral follicle counts at a later stage in
development were not decreased, so the decreased growing follicle count
effect is not considered adverse.
No evidence of specific neurotoxicity was observed in the acute
oral (gavage) and sub-chronic oral (dietary) neurotoxicity (ACN and
SCN) studies in rats, conducted on the benzovindiflupyr technical
product. Although
[[Page 52671]]
benzovindiflupyr caused decreased activity and decreased grip strength
in the neurotoxicity studies, there was no supportive neuro-
histopathology in any study to indicate a specific neurotoxic effect.
The mouse immunotoxicity study was negative by the T-cell Dependent
Antigen Response (TDAR) assay in the mouse.
No systemic effects were noted at the limit dose of 1,000
milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) in the 28-day dermal rat study.
The Agency classified benzovindiflupyr as showing ``Suggestive
Evidence of Carcinogenic Potential'' based on the presence of granular
cell tumors of the brain in male rats only at the highest dose tested.
The Agency concluded that a non-genotoxic mode of action for thyroid
tumors observed in male rats has been established as a result of
upregulation of uridine diphosphate glucuronyltransferase (UDPGT),
increased clearance of T3 and T4 hormones, and increased TSH levels,
resulting in increased thyroid cell proliferation, which progress to
form thyroid tumors. There was no evidence of carcinogenicity in female
rats or in male or female mice. In addition, there is no concern for
mutagenicity. The Agency has determined that using a non-linear
approach (i.e., RfD; reference dose) will adequately account for all
chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity, that could result from
exposure to benzovindiflupyr.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by benzovindiflupyr 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 the document titled ``Benzovindiflupyr. Human
Health Risk Assessment for the Proposed Use on Onion, Bulb Subgroup 3-
07A; Onion, Green, Subgroup 3-07B; and Sugarcane'' on pages 32-38 in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0448.
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 benzovindiflupyr used
for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of October 2, 2015 (80 FR 59627)
(FRL-9933-03).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to benzovindiflupyr, EPA considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing benzovindiflupyr
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.686. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
benzovindiflupyr 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 benzovindiflupyr. In estimating
acute dietary exposure, EPA used 2003-2008 food consumption information
from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA).
As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed 100 percent crop treated
(PCT) and tolerance-level residues.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used 2003-2008 food consumption data from the USDA's
NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed 100 PCT and
tolerance-level residues.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that a nonlinear RfD approach adequately accounts for all
chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity, that could result from
exposure to benzovindiflupyr; therefore, a separate dietary cancer risk
assessment was not performed.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. EPA did not use
anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary assessment for
benzovindiflupyr. Tolerance-level residues and 100 PCT were assumed for
all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening-
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for benzovindiflupyr in drinking water. These simulation
models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of benzovindiflupyr. 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 Surface Water Concentration Calculator (SWCC) model
and the Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM-GW) model, the
estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of benzovindiflupyr for
acute exposures are estimated to be 8.41 parts per billion (ppb) for
surface water and 0.14 ppb for ground water and for chronic exposures
are estimated to be 5.41 ppb for surface water and 0.14 ppb for ground
water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For the acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 8.41 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For the chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 5.41 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).
Benzovindiflupyr is currently registered for the following uses
that could result in residential exposures: Turf and ornamentals. EPA
assessed residential exposure using the following assumptions: For
handlers, exposure is expected as a result of application to turf and
ornamentals. Post-application exposure is also expected as a result of
being in an environment that has been previously treated with
benzovindiflupyr. Both handler and
[[Page 52672]]
post-application exposure is short-term in duration; there are no
intermediate- or long term-exposures expected from the residential uses
of benzovindiflupyr. Only residential handler inhalation and post-
application incidental oral exposure scenarios have been quantitatively
assessed since no dermal hazard was identified. Residential handler
short-term inhalation MOEs are well above the LOC of 100 for all
scenarios assessed and are not of concern (inhalation MOEs are
>=180,000). Residential post-application (incidental oral) MOEs for
children ranged from 8,000 to 3,600,000 on the day of application,
using default input values, and are not of concern (LOC = 100).
The residential scenarios used for the benzovindiflupyr aggregate
assessments were as follows: Adults: Inhalation exposures from treating
ornamentals with a manually pressurized handwand or backpack sprayer;
Children 1 to <2 years old: Post-application hand-to-mouth exposures
from treated turf. These scenarios resulted in the highest residential
exposures and are considered protective of other exposure scenarios.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found benzovindiflupyr to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and benzovindiflupyr does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For
the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
benzovindiflupyr does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There was no evidence of
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility in fetuses or offspring in
the rat and rabbit developmental studies or in the 2-generation rat
reproduction study. Benzovindiflupyr produced effects in rat fetuses
(i.e., decreased fetal weight and ossification) in developmental
toxicity studies at maternally toxic doses. In the rabbit developmental
study, there were no adverse effects in either the does or the fetuses
at the highest dose tested. In reproduction studies, offspring effects
occurred at doses higher than the doses causing parental effects; thus,
there was no quantitative increase in sensitivity in rat pups. The
LOAELs and NOAELs for the rat developmental and rat reproduction
studies were clearly defined.
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 benzovindiflupyr is complete.
ii. There is no indication that benzovindiflupyr is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that benzovindiflupyr 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 benzovindiflupyr in drinking water. EPA used
similarly conservative assumptions to assess post-application exposure
of children as well as incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
benzovindiflupyr.
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 benzovindiflupyr will occupy 43% of the aPAD for children 1-2 years
old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
benzovindiflupyr from food and water will utilize 19% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
benzovindiflupyr 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).
Benzovindiflupyr is currently registered for uses that could result
in short-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that
it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water
with short-term residential exposures to benzovindiflupyr.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 2100 for adults
and 510 for children. Because EPA's level of concern for
benzovindiflupyr is a MOE
[[Page 52673]]
of 100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
benzovindiflupyr 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 benzovindiflupyr.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the
discussion in Unit III.A., EPA considers the chronic aggregate risk
assessment to be protective of any aggregate cancer risk. As there is
no chronic risk of concern, EPA does not expect any cancer risk to the
U.S. population from aggregate exposure to benzovindiflupyr.
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 benzovindiflupyr residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An adequate analytical method is available to enforce the proposed
tolerances for benzovindiflupyr in plant and livestock commodities. A
Quick, Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged, and Safe (QuEChERS) multi-
residue method (EN15662:2009) was developed for the determination of
residues of benzovindiflupyr via liquid chromatography-mass
spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS).
The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD
20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established any MRLs for benzovindiflupyr.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of
benzovindiflupyr, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on
onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A at 0.02 ppm; onion, green, subgroup 3-07B
at 0.40 ppm; and the existing ``sugarcane, cane'' tolerance is
increased from 0.04 ppm to 0.30 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 12, 2017.
Michael L. Goodis,
Director Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
[[Page 52674]]
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. 180.686, amend the table in paragraph (a) by:
0
i. Adding alphabetically the commodities ``Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-
07A'', ``Onion, green, subgroup 3-07B'', and
0
ii. Revising the commodity ``Sugarcane, cane''.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 180.686 Benzovindiflupyr; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A.................................. 0.02
Onion, green, subgroup 3-07B................................. 0.40
* * * * *
Sugarcane, cane.............................................. 0.30
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-24109 Filed 11-13-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P