Indoxacarb; Pesticide Tolerances, 57860-57866 [2017-26517]
Download as PDF
57860
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
Commodity
VII. Congressional Review Act
Tomato ........................................
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).
Parts per
million
1 7.0
1 Some
of these tolerances were established
on the basis of data acquired at the public
hearings held in 1950 (formerly § 180.101) and
the remainder were established on the basis
of pesticide petitions presented under the procedure specified in the amendment to the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act by
Public Law 518, 83d Congress (68 Stat. 511).
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–25713 Filed 12–7–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: November 9, 2017.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.116, revise paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
■
Ziram; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of the fungicide
ziram (zinc dimethyldithiocarbamate),
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities in
the table below as a result of the
application of ziram. Compliance with
the tolerance levels specified below is to
be determined by measuring total
dithiocarbamates, determined as CS2,
evolved during acid digestion and
expressed as zinc
ethylenebisdithiocarbamate.
Parts per
million
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Commodity
Almond ........................................
Apple ...........................................
Apricot .........................................
Blueberry ....................................
Cherry, sweet .............................
Cherry, tart ..................................
Grape ..........................................
Hazelnut ......................................
Huckleberry .................................
Peach ..........................................
Pear ............................................
Pecan ..........................................
Quince ........................................
Strawberry ..................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:41 Dec 07, 2017
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0095; FRL–9970–39]
Indoxacarb; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of indoxacarb in
or on corn, field, forage; corn, field,
stover; corn, field, grain. E. I. du Pont de
Nemours and Company requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 8, 2017. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 6, 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–2017–0095, 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 L. Goodis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
SUMMARY:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
§ 180.116
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
1 0.10
Jkt 244001
1 7.0
1 7.0
1 7.0
1 7.0
1 7.0
7.0
0.10
7.0
7.0
1 7.0
0.10
1 7.0
7.0
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DC 20460–0001; main telephone
number: (703) 305–7090; email address:
RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2017–0095 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 February 6, 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
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2017–0095, 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.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of June 8, 2017
(82 FR 26641) (FRL–9961–14), 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 6F8536) by E. I. du Pont de
Nemours and Company, 974 Centre
Road, Wilmington, Delaware 19805. The
petition requested that 40 CFR part 180
be amended by establishing tolerances
for residues of the insecticide
indoxacarb, [(S)-methyl 7-chloro-2,5dihydro-2-[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4(trifluoromethoxy)-phenyl]
amino]carbonyl]indeno[1,2e]
[1,3,4]oxadiazine-4a(3H)-carboxylate],
and [(R)-methyl 7 chloro-2,5-dihydro2[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]
amino]carbonyl]indeno[1,2-e][1,3,4]
oxadiazine-4a(3H)-carboxylate], in or on
corn, field, forage at 10 parts per million
(ppm); corn, field, stover at 15 ppm;
corn, field, aspirated grain fractions at
45 ppm; corn, field flour at 0.07 ppm;
corn, field, meal at 0.03 ppm; corn,
field, oil at 0.05 ppm; corn, field, grain
at 0.02 ppm. That document referenced
a summary of the petition prepared by
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company,
the registrant, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
Based on available information, EPA
is establishing some tolerances that vary
from what the petitioner requested. The
reasons for these changes are discussed
in Unit IV.C.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Dec 07, 2017
Jkt 244001
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 indoxacarb
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with indoxacarb follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
The most common effects resulting
from exposure to indoxacarb (defined by
the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level
(LOAEL)) were non-specific, and
included decreases in body weight, food
consumption, and food efficiency.
Indoxacarb also affected the
hematopoietic system by decreasing the
red blood cell count, hemoglobin, and
hematocrit in rats, dogs, and mice.
There was no evidence of
reproductive effects in rats resulting
from exposure to indoxacarb. There was
no evidence of increased susceptibility
in developing fetuses or in offspring
following prenatal and/or postnatal
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
57861
exposure to indoxacarb in rats or
rabbits. There was no evidence of
increased susceptibility in the young in
the developmental neurotoxicity study
in rats. Neurotoxicity was observed in
rats and mice, but at doses much higher
than those selected for points of
departure (PoDs) (which are based on
changes in body weight, food
consumption and changes in
hematology). There is no evidence
indoxacarb is carcinogenic, teratogenic,
mutagenic, or immunotoxic.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by indoxacarb as well as
the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in the documents,
Indoxacarb: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Indoxacarb to Support
the Proposed New Uses on Corn (Field,
Pop, and Grown for Seed) in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0095 and
Indoxacarb: Human Health Draft Risk
Assessment for Indoxacarb to Support
Registration Review and the Proposed
New Use for Controlling Ants at
Ornamental Nurseries, Sod Farms, and
Livestock Corrals of non-Food Bearing
Animals in docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2013–0367.
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
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
57862
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for indoxacarb used for
human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR INDOXACARB FOR USE IN
HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
Point of departure
and uncertainty/
safety factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Acute dietary (All populations) ...............
NOAEL = 12 mg/
kg/day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Acute RfD = 0.12
mg/kg/day.
aPAD = 0.12mg/
kg/day.
Acute oral rate neurotoxicity study LOAEL = 50 mg/kg/day
based on decreased body weight and body-weight gain
in females (MP062).
Chronic dietary (All populations) ............
NOAEL= 2.0 mg/
kg/day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Chronic RfD =
0.02 mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.02 mg/
kg/day.
Weight of evidence approach was used from four studies:
Exposure/scenario
Study and toxicological effects
(1) Subchronic toxicity study—rat (MP062). MRID
44477129. LOAEL = 6.0 (M), 3.8 (F) mg/kg/day based on
decreased body weight, body-weight gain, food consumption and food efficiency.
(2) Subchronic neurotoxicity study—rat (MP062). MRID
44477135. LOAEL = 5.6 (M), 3.3 (F) mg/kg/day based on
decreased body weight and alopecia.
(3) Chronic/carcinogenicity study—rat (JW062). MRID
44477145. LOAEL = 10 (M), 3.6 (F) mg/kg/day based on
decreased body weight, body-weight gain, and food consumption and food efficiency; decreased HCT, HGB and
RBC at 6 months in F only.
(4) Two-generation rat reproduction study (JW062). MRID
44477144.
LOAEL = 4.4 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weights,
body-weight gain, food consumption and food efficiency
and increased spleen weights in the F0 and F1 females.
Incidental oral short-term (1 to 30 days)
NOAEL= 2.0 mg/
kg/day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE =
100.
Weight of evidence approach was used from four studies:
(1) Subchronic toxicity study—rat (MP062). MRID
44477129. LOAEL = 6.0 (M), 3.8 (F) mg/kg/day based on
decreased body weight, body-weight gain, food consumption and food efficiency.
(2) Subchronic neurotoxicity study—rat (MP062). MRID
44477135. LOAEL = 5.6 (M), 3.3 (F) mg/kg/day based on
decreased body weight and alopecia.
(3) Chronic/carcinogenicity study—rat (JW062). MRID
44477145. LOAEL = 10 (M), 3.6 (F) mg/kg/day based on
decreased body weight, body-weight gain, and food consumption and food efficiency; decreased HCT, HGB and
RBC at 6 months in F only.
(4) Two-generation rat reproduction study (JW062). MRID
44477144.
LOAEL = 4.4 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weights,
body-weight gain, food consumption and food efficiency
and increased spleen weights in the F0 and F1 females.
A quantitative dermal assessment is not required for indoxacarb, since the calculated human dermal
LOAEL exceeds the limit dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day.
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 days) ......
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Short-Term Dermal (1 to 30 days) .........
Intermediate-Term Dermal (1–6 months)
Inhalation
NOAEL= 23 μg/
L/day.
UFA = 3x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 30
18:41 Dec 07, 2017
Jkt 244001
toxicity
study
(MP062).
MRID
The LOAEL of 290 μg/L/day is based on increased spleen
weights, pigmentation and hematopoiesis in the spleen,
hematological changes, mortality (females), and nasal ulceration and inflammation.
Inhalation (1–6 months) .........................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
28-day rat inhalation
45870001.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
57863
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR INDOXACARB FOR USE IN—Continued
HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
Point of departure
and uncertainty/
safety factors
Exposure/scenario
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) ...........
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
‘‘Not likely’’ to be carcinogenic to humans since no evidence of carcinogenicity in either the rat or
mouse studies, and no evidence of mutagenicity.
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day =
milligram/kilogram/day. μg/L/day = microgram/liter/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to indoxacarb, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing
indoxacarb tolerances in 40 CFR
180.564. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from indoxacarb 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 indoxacarb. In conducting the acute
dietary exposure assessment EPA used
food consumption information from the
2003–2008 food consumption data from
the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s
(USDA’s) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America, (NHANES/WWEIA). In
estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA
used maximum residue levels based on
the results of field trials reflecting
maximum use patterns in all
commodities and used maximum
Percent Crop Treated (PCT) estimates.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, EPA used food
consumption information from the
2003–2008 food consumption data from
the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s
(USDA’s) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America, (NHANES/WWEIA). In
estimating chronic dietary exposure,
EPA used average residue levels based
on the results of field trials reflecting
maximum use patterns in all
commodities and used average PCT
estimates.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that indoxacarb does not
pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore,
a dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Dec 07, 2017
Jkt 244001
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT
information. Average or maximum
residues and PCT values were used for
food commodities.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA
authorizes EPA to use available data and
information on the anticipated residue
levels of pesticide residues in food and
the actual levels of pesticide residues
that have been measured in food. If EPA
relies on such information, EPA must
require pursuant to FFDCA section
408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years
after the tolerance is established,
modified, or left in effect, demonstrating
that the levels in food are not above the
levels anticipated. For the present
action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
as are required by FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be
required to be submitted no later than
5 years from the date of issuance of
these tolerances.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states
that the Agency may use data on the
actual percent of food treated for
assessing chronic dietary risk only if:
• Condition a: The data used are
reliable and provide a valid basis to
show what percentage of the food
derived from such crop is likely to
contain the pesticide residue.
• Condition b: The exposure estimate
does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group.
• Condition c: Data are available on
pesticide use and food consumption in
a particular area, the exposure estimate
does not understate exposure for the
population in such area.
In addition, the Agency must provide
for periodic evaluation of any estimates
used. To provide for the periodic
evaluation of the estimate of PCT as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F),
EPA may require registrants to submit
data on PCT.
The Agency estimated maximum and
average PCT values for the acute and
chronic dietary assessments, as follows:
• For acute dietary assessment:
Apples: 10%; apricots: 15%;
blueberries: 5%; broccoli: 70%, cabbage:
35%; cantaloupe: 10%; cauliflower:
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
60%; celery: 5%; cherries: 2.5%; cotton:
2.5%; cucumbers: 10%; grapes: 5%;
lettuce: 15%; nectarines: 15%; peaches:
10%; peanuts: 10%; pears: 2.5%;
peppers: 30%; plums/prunes: 5%;
potatoes: 2.5%; soybeans: 2.5%;
spinach: 5%; squash: 5%; sweet corn:
10%; and tomatoes: 40%.
• For chronic dietary assessment:
Apples: 5%; apricots: 5%; blueberries:
5% broccoli: 45%, cabbage: 20%;
cantaloupe: 5%; cauliflower: 35%;
celery: 5%; cherries: 2.5%; cotton:
2.5%; cucumbers: 2.5%; grapes: 2.5%;
lettuce: 5%; nectarines: 15%; peaches:
2.5%; peanuts: 5%; pears: 1%; peppers:
15%; plums/prunes: 5%; potatoes:
2.5%; soybeans: 1%; spinach: 2.5%;
squash: 2.5%; sweet corn: 2.5%; and
tomatoes: 20%.
In most cases, EPA uses available data
from United States Department of
Agriculture/National Agricultural
Statistics Service (USDA/NASS),
proprietary market surveys, and the
National Pesticide Use Database for the
chemical/crop combination for the most
recent 6 to 7 years. EPA uses an average
PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis.
The average PCT figure for each existing
use is derived by combining available
public and private market survey data
for that use, averaging across all
observations, and rounding to the
nearest 5%, except for those situations
in which the average PCT is less than
2.5%. In those cases, estimates of
average PCT between 1% and 2.5% are
rounded to 2.5% and estimates of
average PCT less than 1% are rounded
to 1%. EPA uses a maximum PCT for
acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the highest
observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available
public and private market survey data
for the existing use and rounded up to
the nearest multiple of 5%, except for
those situations in which the maximum
PCT is less than 2.5%. In those cases,
EPA uses a maximum PCT value of
2.5%.
The Agency believes the three
conditions discussed in Unit III.C.1.iv.
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
57864
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
have been met. With respect to
Condition a, PCT estimates are derived
from Federal and private market survey
data, which are reliable and have a valid
basis. The Agency is reasonably certain
that the percentage of the food treated
is not likely to be an underestimation.
As to Conditions b and c, regional
consumption information and
consumption information for significant
subpopulations is taken into account
through EPA’s computer-based model
for evaluating the exposure of
significant subpopulations including
several regional groups. Use of this
consumption information in EPA’s risk
assessment process ensures that EPA’s
exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant
subpopulation group and allows the
Agency to be reasonably certain that no
regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those
estimated by the Agency. Other than the
data available through national food
consumption surveys, EPA does not
have available reliable information on
the regional consumption of food to
which indoxacarb may be applied in a
particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening-level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for indoxacarb in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of indoxacarb.
Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at
https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/
water/index.htm.
Based on the Surface Water
Concentration Calculator (SWCC) model
and the Pesticide Root Zone Model
Ground Water (PRZM GW), the
estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) of indoxacarb for acute
exposures are 39 parts per billion (ppb)
for surface water and 131 ppb for
ground water; for chronic exposures the
EDWCs are 11 ppb for surface water and
123 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For the
acute dietary risk assessment, a time
series distribution of ground water
modeled residues was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water. For the
chronic dietary risk assessment, a single
point water concentration value of 123
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Dec 07, 2017
Jkt 244001
(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control,
indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pets).
Indoxacarb is currently registered for
the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Pet spot-on uses,
spot, crack and crevice applications
indoors, outdoor broadcast (i.e., turf),
perimeter and foundations, spot (i.e.,
direct mount applications for fire ants),
and crack and crevice.
Based on these use scenarios, EPA
assessed residential exposure using the
following assumptions:
• Spot and crack and crevice
exposures were not assessed due to
formulation types that minimize the
potential for handler and postapplication exposures (i.e., gels or bait
stations). Risks from spot and crack and
crevice were not assessed because
exposures from these formulation types
are expected to be negligible.
• Residential handler exposure:
There is a potential for dermal and
inhalation exposure. Residential
handler inhalation exposure is
considered negligible for applying
ready-to-use pet spot-ons. Residential
handler dermal exposures are expected
for ready-to-use pet spot-ons, however
dermal exposures were not assessed due
to the lack of a dermal endpoint.
Residential handler inhalation and
dermal exposures are considered
negligible for applying ready-to-use
arenas (i.e., baits or stations).
• Residential post-application dermal
and incidental oral exposure: Postapplication assessments were not
conducted for ant mound uses, because
these are considered perimeter/spot
uses; residential exposure is expected to
be negligible. Spot and crack and
crevice exposures were not assessed for
gels or bait stations; exposure is
considered negligible. A golfer
assessment was not conducted, due to
the lack of a dermal endpoint. Postapplication inhalation exposure is
generally not assessed following
application to pets and turf. The
combination of low vapor pressure
(1.9x10–10 mm Hg at 25 ßC for
indoxacarb) of active ingredients
typically used in pet and turf pesticide
products, and the small amounts of
pesticide applied to pets is expected to
result in only negligible inhalation
exposure. Ingestion of granules is
considered an episodic event and not a
routine behavior. Because the Agency
does not expect this to occur on a
regular basis, concern for human health
is related to acute poisoning rather than
short-term residue exposure. For these
reasons, the episodic ingestion scenario
is not included in the aggregate
assessment. The only route of
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
residential exposure for inclusion in the
adult aggregate assessment is inhalation.
However, inhalation exposures cannot
be aggregated with background dietary
exposures because the toxicity
endpoints for the inhalation and shortterm oral routes are different. Therefore,
the only residential exposures that were
combined are for children 1 to <2 years
old in the short-term aggregate
assessment that reflects hand-to-mouth
exposures from post-application
exposure to spot treatment on carpets,
and children 1 to <2 years old in the
intermediate- and long-term aggregate
assessment that reflects exposures from
treated pets.
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
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 indoxacarb to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
indoxacarb does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA
assumed that indoxacarb does not have
a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s Web site at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
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 10 times;, or uses a
different additional safety factor when
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
reliable data available to EPA support
the choice of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There was no evidence of reproductive
effects in rats. There was no evidence of
increased susceptibility in developing
fetuses or in the offspring following
prenatal and/or postnatal exposure to
indoxacarb in rats or rabbits. There was
no evidence of increased susceptibility
in the young in the developmental
neurotoxicity study in rats.
3. Conclusion. EPA determined
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 indoxacarb
is complete.
ii. The acute neurotoxicity,
subchronic toxicity, and developmental
neurotoxicity studies for indoxacarb are
available and all endpoints used in the
risk assessment are protective of
neurotoxic effects.
iii. There is no evidence that
indoxacarb 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 Agency estimated maximum and
average PCT values for the acute and
chronic dietary assessments,
respectively, as shown in unit III.C.i.,
and unit III.C.ii.
Food residues were taken from the
results of supervised field trial studies
reflecting maximum use patterns.
Drinking water residues were included
in the dietary assessments as follows: A
point estimate of 123 ppb was used for
the chronic assessment and the time
series distribution of ground water
modeled residues was used in the acute
assessment as a residue distribution file
(RDF) in the Monte Carlo analysis. For
food commodities, RDFs were
constructed for the probabilistic acute
dietary assessment as appropriate, and
average residues were computed for
blended commodities and for the
chronic dietary assessment.
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 indoxacarb.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Dec 07, 2017
Jkt 244001
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
indoxacarb will occupy 56% of the
aPAD for children ages 1–2, 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 indoxacarb
from food and water will utilize 35% of
the cPAD for all infants less than 1-year
old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. EPA has concluded
the combined long-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in
aggregate MOEs of 260 (food, water, and
residential) for children aged 1–2.
Because EPA’s level of concern for
indoxacarb is a MOE of 100 or below,
this MOEs is not of concern. For adults,
residential inhalation exposures cannot
be aggregated because they are based on
different effects than for oral exposures.
Therefore, long-term aggregate risk for
adults is equivalent to the chronic
dietary risk noted in this unit.
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). Indoxacarb 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 to children aged 1–2 years
through food and water with short-term
residential exposures to indoxacarb. For
adults, residential inhalation exposures
cannot be aggregated because they are
based on different effects than for oral
exposures. Therefore, short-term
aggregate risk for adults is equivalent to
the chronic risk noted in unit III.E.2.
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 120 (food, water, and
residential) for children aged 1–2.
Because EPA’s level of concern for
indoxacarb is a MOE of 100 or below,
this MOEs is not of concern.
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
57865
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).
Indoxacarb is currently registered for
uses that could result in intermediateterm residential exposure, and the
Agency has determined that it is
appropriate to aggregate chronic
exposure to children aged 1–2 years
through food and water with
intermediate-term residential exposures
to indoxacarb. For adults, residential
inhalation exposures cannot be
aggregated because they are based on
different effects than for oral exposures.
Therefore, intermediate-term aggregate
risk for adults is equivalent to the
chronic risk noted above in unit III.E.2.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for intermediateterm exposures, EPA has concluded that
the combined intermediate-term food,
water, and residential exposures for
children aged 1–2 years result in
aggregate MOEs of 260. Because EPA’s
level of concern for indoxacarb is a
MOE of 100 or below, this MOE is not
of concern.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
indoxacarb is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to indoxacarb
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
For the enforcement of tolerances
established on crops, two High
Performance Liquid Chromatograph/
Ultraviolet Detection (HPLC/UV)
methods, DuPont protocols AMR 2712–
93 and DuPont–11978, are available for
use. The limits of quantitation (LOQs)
for these methods range from 0.01 to
0.05 ppm for a variety of plant
commodities. A third procedure, Gas
Chromatograph/Mass-Selective
Detection (GC/MSD), DuPont method
AMR 3493–95 Supplement No. 4, is also
available for the confirmation of
residues in plants.
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
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
57866
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established MRLs
in field corn for indoxacarb.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
Based on available data and using the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD) maximum
residue limit (MRL) calculation
procedures, EPA determined that the
appropriate tolerance level for corn,
field, forage is 6.0 ppm. Based on the
corn processing studies, the Agency
determined that there is a low level of
residue concentration from processing;
therefore, separate tolerances are not
needed for the processed corn
commodities of flour, meal, or oil
because these commodities are covered
by the tolerance for corn, field, grain.
The ‘‘grain, aspirated fractions’’
tolerance does not need to be modified
for field corn because 40 CFR 180.564(a)
currently lists a tolerance level of 45
ppm for ‘‘grain, aspirated fractions,’’
and this tolerance covers potential
indoxacarb residues in aspirated grain
fractions derived from corn.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of indoxacarb, [(S)-methyl
7-chloro-2,5-dihydro-2[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4(trifluoromethoxy)-phenyl]
amino]carbonyl]
indeno[1,2e][1,3,4]oxadiazine-4a(3H)carboxylate], and [(R)-methyl 7 chloro2,5-dihydro-2[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]
amino]carbonyl] indeno [1,2-e][1,3,4]
oxadiazine-4a(3H)-carboxylate], in or on
corn, field, forage at 6.0 ppm; corn,
field, stover at 15 ppm; and corn, field,
grain at 0.02 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes tolerances
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:24 Dec 07, 2017
Jkt 244001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
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: November 22, 2017.
Michael Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.564, add alphabetically the
entries for ‘‘Corn, field, forage’’, ‘‘Corn,
field, grain’’, and ‘‘Corn, field, stover’’ to
the table in paragraph (a)(1) to read as
follows:
■
§ 180.564 Indoxacarb; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
Corn, field, forage .................
Corn, field, grain ...................
Corn, field, stover .................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
6.0
0.02
15
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–26517 Filed 12–7–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\08DER1.SGM
08DER1
*
*
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 235 (Friday, December 8, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57860-57866]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26517]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0095; FRL-9970-39]
Indoxacarb; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
indoxacarb in or on corn, field, forage; corn, field, stover; corn,
field, grain. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective December 8, 2017. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 6, 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-2017-0095, 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 L. 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:
[email protected].
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-2017-0095 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
February 6, 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
[[Page 57861]]
by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0095, 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 June 8, 2017 (82 FR 26641) (FRL-9961-
14), 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
6F8536) by E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, 974 Centre Road,
Wilmington, Delaware 19805. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180
be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide
indoxacarb, [(S)-methyl 7-chloro-2,5-dihydro-2-[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4-
(trifluoromethoxy)-phenyl] amino]carbonyl]indeno[1,2e]
[1,3,4]oxadiazine-4a(3H)-carboxylate], and [(R)-methyl 7 chloro-2,5-
dihydro-2[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]
amino]carbonyl]indeno[1,2-e][1,3,4] oxadiazine-4a(3H)-carboxylate], in
or on corn, field, forage at 10 parts per million (ppm); corn, field,
stover at 15 ppm; corn, field, aspirated grain fractions at 45 ppm;
corn, field flour at 0.07 ppm; corn, field, meal at 0.03 ppm; corn,
field, oil at 0.05 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.02 ppm. That document
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by E. I. du Pont de
Nemours and Company, the registrant, which is available in the docket,
https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response
to the notice of filing.
Based on available information, EPA is establishing some tolerances
that vary from what the petitioner requested. The reasons for these
changes are discussed in Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including 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 indoxacarb including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with indoxacarb follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
The most common effects resulting from exposure to indoxacarb
(defined by the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL)) were non-
specific, and included decreases in body weight, food consumption, and
food efficiency. Indoxacarb also affected the hematopoietic system by
decreasing the red blood cell count, hemoglobin, and hematocrit in
rats, dogs, and mice.
There was no evidence of reproductive effects in rats resulting
from exposure to indoxacarb. There was no evidence of increased
susceptibility in developing fetuses or in offspring following prenatal
and/or postnatal exposure to indoxacarb in rats or rabbits. There was
no evidence of increased susceptibility in the young in the
developmental neurotoxicity study in rats. Neurotoxicity was observed
in rats and mice, but at doses much higher than those selected for
points of departure (PoDs) (which are based on changes in body weight,
food consumption and changes in hematology). There is no evidence
indoxacarb is carcinogenic, teratogenic, mutagenic, or immunotoxic.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by indoxacarb 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 documents, Indoxacarb: Human Health Risk
Assessment for Indoxacarb to Support the Proposed New Uses on Corn
(Field, Pop, and Grown for Seed) in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-
0095 and Indoxacarb: Human Health Draft Risk Assessment for Indoxacarb
to Support Registration Review and the Proposed New Use for Controlling
Ants at Ornamental Nurseries, Sod Farms, and Livestock Corrals of non-
Food Bearing Animals in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0367.
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
[[Page 57862]]
assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for indoxacarb used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Indoxacarb for Use in
Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure and Study and
Exposure/scenario uncertainty/ safety RfD, PAD, LOC for risk toxicological
factors assessment effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (All populations).. NOAEL = 12 mg/kg/day....... Acute RfD = 0.12 mg/kg/day. Acute oral rate
UFA = 10x.................. aPAD = 0.12mg/kg/day....... neurotoxicity
UFH = 10x.................. study LOAEL = 50
FQPA SF = 1x............... mg/kg/day based on
decreased body
weight and body-
weight gain in
females (MP062).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations) NOAEL= 2.0 mg/kg/day....... Chronic RfD = 0.02 mg/kg/ Weight of evidence
day. approach was used
from four studies:
UFA = 10x cPAD = 0.02 mg/kg/day...... (1) Subchronic
UFH = 10x.................. toxicity study--
FQPA SF = 1x............... rat (MP062). MRID
44477129. LOAEL =
6.0 (M), 3.8 (F)
mg/kg/day based on
decreased body
weight, body-
weight gain, food
consumption and
food efficiency.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Subchronic
neurotoxicity
study--rat
(MP062). MRID
44477135. LOAEL =
5.6 (M), 3.3 (F)
mg/kg/day based on
decreased body
weight and
alopecia.
(3) Chronic/
carcinogenicity
study--rat
(JW062). MRID
44477145. LOAEL =
10 (M), 3.6 (F) mg/
kg/day based on
decreased body
weight, body-
weight gain, and
food consumption
and food
efficiency;
decreased HCT, HGB
and RBC at 6
months in F only.
(4) Two-generation
rat reproduction
study (JW062).
MRID 44477144.
LOAEL = 4.4 mg/kg/
day based on
decreased body
weights, body-
weight gain, food
consumption and
food efficiency
and increased
spleen weights in
the F0 and F1
females.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidental oral short-term (1 to NOAEL= 2.0 mg/kg/day....... LOC for MOE = 100.......... Weight of evidence
30 days). UFA = 10x.................. approach was used
UFH = 10x.................. from four studies:
FQPA SF = 1x............... (1) Subchronic
toxicity study--
rat (MP062). MRID
44477129. LOAEL =
6.0 (M), 3.8 (F)
mg/kg/day based on
decreased body
weight, body-
weight gain, food
consumption and
food efficiency.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Subchronic
neurotoxicity
study--rat
(MP062). MRID
44477135. LOAEL =
5.6 (M), 3.3 (F)
mg/kg/day based on
decreased body
weight and
alopecia.
(3) Chronic/
carcinogenicity
study--rat
(JW062). MRID
44477145. LOAEL =
10 (M), 3.6 (F) mg/
kg/day based on
decreased body
weight, body-
weight gain, and
food consumption
and food
efficiency;
decreased HCT, HGB
and RBC at 6
months in F only.
(4) Two-generation
rat reproduction
study (JW062).
MRID 44477144.
LOAEL = 4.4 mg/kg/
day based on
decreased body
weights, body-
weight gain, food
consumption and
food efficiency
and increased
spleen weights in
the F0 and F1
females.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short-Term Dermal (1 to 30 days). A quantitative dermal assessment is not required for indoxacarb, since the
Intermediate-Term Dermal (1-6 calculated human dermal LOAEL exceeds the limit dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day.
months).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 Inhalation NOAEL= 23 LOC for MOE = 30........... 28-day rat
days). [micro]g/L/day. inhalation
UFA = 3x................... toxicity study
UFH = 10x.................. (MP062). MRID
FQPA SF = 1x............... 45870001.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inhalation (1-6 months).......... The LOAEL of 290
[micro]g/L/day is
based on increased
spleen weights,
pigmentation and
hematopoiesis in
the spleen,
hematological
changes, mortality
(females), and
nasal ulceration
and inflammation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 57863]]
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) ``Not likely'' to be carcinogenic to humans since no evidence of
carcinogenicity in either the rat or mouse studies, and no evidence of
mutagenicity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level
of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. [micro]g/L/day = microgram/liter/day. MOE = margin of
exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic).
RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH =
potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to indoxacarb, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing indoxacarb tolerances in 40 CFR
180.564. EPA assessed dietary exposures from indoxacarb 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 indoxacarb. In conducting the acute dietary exposure assessment EPA
used food consumption information from the 2003-2008 food consumption
data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health
and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/
WWEIA). In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used maximum residue
levels based on the results of field trials reflecting maximum use
patterns in all commodities and used maximum Percent Crop Treated (PCT)
estimates.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, EPA used food consumption information from the 2003-2008
food consumption data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
(USDA's) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat
in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). In estimating chronic dietary exposure, EPA
used average residue levels based on the results of field trials
reflecting maximum use patterns in all commodities and used average PCT
estimates.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that indoxacarb does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and PCT information. Average or maximum
residues and PCT values were used for food commodities.
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data
and information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues
in food and the actual levels of pesticide residues that have been
measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must require
pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after
the tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect,
demonstrating that the levels in food are not above the levels
anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such data call-ins
as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to be submitted no later
than 5 years from the date of issuance of these tolerances.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary
risk only if:
Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a
valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop
is likely to contain the pesticide residue.
Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
Condition c: Data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area.
In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any
estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate
of PCT as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require
registrants to submit data on PCT.
The Agency estimated maximum and average PCT values for the acute
and chronic dietary assessments, as follows:
For acute dietary assessment: Apples: 10%; apricots: 15%;
blueberries: 5%; broccoli: 70%, cabbage: 35%; cantaloupe: 10%;
cauliflower: 60%; celery: 5%; cherries: 2.5%; cotton: 2.5%; cucumbers:
10%; grapes: 5%; lettuce: 15%; nectarines: 15%; peaches: 10%; peanuts:
10%; pears: 2.5%; peppers: 30%; plums/prunes: 5%; potatoes: 2.5%;
soybeans: 2.5%; spinach: 5%; squash: 5%; sweet corn: 10%; and tomatoes:
40%.
For chronic dietary assessment: Apples: 5%; apricots: 5%;
blueberries: 5% broccoli: 45%, cabbage: 20%; cantaloupe: 5%;
cauliflower: 35%; celery: 5%; cherries: 2.5%; cotton: 2.5%; cucumbers:
2.5%; grapes: 2.5%; lettuce: 5%; nectarines: 15%; peaches: 2.5%;
peanuts: 5%; pears: 1%; peppers: 15%; plums/prunes: 5%; potatoes: 2.5%;
soybeans: 1%; spinach: 2.5%; squash: 2.5%; sweet corn: 2.5%; and
tomatoes: 20%.
In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States
Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service
(USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and the National Pesticide Use
Database for the chemical/crop combination for the most recent 6 to 7
years. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis. The
average PCT figure for each existing use is derived by combining
available public and private market survey data for that use, averaging
across all observations, and rounding to the nearest 5%, except for
those situations in which the average PCT is less than 2.5%. In those
cases, estimates of average PCT between 1% and 2.5% are rounded to 2.5%
and estimates of average PCT less than 1% are rounded to 1%. EPA uses a
maximum PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The maximum PCT figure is
the highest observed maximum value reported within the recent 6 years
of available public and private market survey data for the existing use
and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%, except for those
situations in which the maximum PCT is less than 2.5%. In those cases,
EPA uses a maximum PCT value of 2.5%.
The Agency believes the three conditions discussed in Unit
III.C.1.iv.
[[Page 57864]]
have been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates are derived
from Federal and private market survey data, which are reliable and
have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that the
percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an underestimation.
As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption information and
consumption information for significant subpopulations is taken into
account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating the exposure
of significant subpopulations including several regional groups. Use of
this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment process ensures
that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency to be reasonably
certain that no regional population is exposed to residue levels higher
than those estimated by the Agency. Other than the data available
through national food consumption surveys, EPA does not have available
reliable information on the regional consumption of food to which
indoxacarb may be applied in a particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening-
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for indoxacarb in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of indoxacarb. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
Based on the Surface Water Concentration Calculator (SWCC) model
and the Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM GW), the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of indoxacarb for acute exposures
are 39 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 131 ppb for ground
water; for chronic exposures the EDWCs are 11 ppb for surface water and
123 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For the acute dietary risk
assessment, a time series distribution of ground water modeled residues
was used to assess the contribution to drinking water. For the chronic
dietary risk assessment, a single point water concentration value of
123 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).
Indoxacarb is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: Pet spot-on uses, spot, crack
and crevice applications indoors, outdoor broadcast (i.e., turf),
perimeter and foundations, spot (i.e., direct mount applications for
fire ants), and crack and crevice.
Based on these use scenarios, EPA assessed residential exposure
using the following assumptions:
Spot and crack and crevice exposures were not assessed due
to formulation types that minimize the potential for handler and post-
application exposures (i.e., gels or bait stations). Risks from spot
and crack and crevice were not assessed because exposures from these
formulation types are expected to be negligible.
Residential handler exposure: There is a potential for
dermal and inhalation exposure. Residential handler inhalation exposure
is considered negligible for applying ready-to-use pet spot-ons.
Residential handler dermal exposures are expected for ready-to-use pet
spot-ons, however dermal exposures were not assessed due to the lack of
a dermal endpoint. Residential handler inhalation and dermal exposures
are considered negligible for applying ready-to-use arenas (i.e., baits
or stations).
Residential post-application dermal and incidental oral
exposure: Post-application assessments were not conducted for ant mound
uses, because these are considered perimeter/spot uses; residential
exposure is expected to be negligible. Spot and crack and crevice
exposures were not assessed for gels or bait stations; exposure is
considered negligible. A golfer assessment was not conducted, due to
the lack of a dermal endpoint. Post-application inhalation exposure is
generally not assessed following application to pets and turf. The
combination of low vapor pressure (1.9x10-10 mm Hg at 25 [ordm]C for
indoxacarb) of active ingredients typically used in pet and turf
pesticide products, and the small amounts of pesticide applied to pets
is expected to result in only negligible inhalation exposure. Ingestion
of granules is considered an episodic event and not a routine behavior.
Because the Agency does not expect this to occur on a regular basis,
concern for human health is related to acute poisoning rather than
short-term residue exposure. For these reasons, the episodic ingestion
scenario is not included in the aggregate assessment. The only route of
residential exposure for inclusion in the adult aggregate assessment is
inhalation. However, inhalation exposures cannot be aggregated with
background dietary exposures because the toxicity endpoints for the
inhalation and short-term oral routes are different. Therefore, the
only residential exposures that were combined are for children 1 to <2
years old in the short-term aggregate assessment that reflects hand-to-
mouth exposures from post-application exposure to spot treatment on
carpets, and children 1 to <2 years old in the intermediate- and long-
term aggregate assessment that reflects exposures from treated pets.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
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 indoxacarb to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and indoxacarb does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA assumed that
indoxacarb does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
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 10 times;, or uses a different additional safety factor when
[[Page 57865]]
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There was no evidence of
reproductive effects in rats. There was no evidence of increased
susceptibility in developing fetuses or in the offspring following
prenatal and/or postnatal exposure to indoxacarb in rats or rabbits.
There was no evidence of increased susceptibility in the young in the
developmental neurotoxicity study in rats.
3. Conclusion. EPA determined 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 indoxacarb is complete.
ii. The acute neurotoxicity, subchronic toxicity, and developmental
neurotoxicity studies for indoxacarb are available and all endpoints
used in the risk assessment are protective of neurotoxic effects.
iii. There is no evidence that indoxacarb 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 Agency estimated maximum and average PCT values for the
acute and chronic dietary assessments, respectively, as shown in unit
III.C.i., and unit III.C.ii.
Food residues were taken from the results of supervised field trial
studies reflecting maximum use patterns. Drinking water residues were
included in the dietary assessments as follows: A point estimate of 123
ppb was used for the chronic assessment and the time series
distribution of ground water modeled residues was used in the acute
assessment as a residue distribution file (RDF) in the Monte Carlo
analysis. For food commodities, RDFs were constructed for the
probabilistic acute dietary assessment as appropriate, and average
residues were computed for blended commodities and for the chronic
dietary assessment.
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 indoxacarb.
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 indoxacarb will occupy 56% of the aPAD for children ages 1-2, 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
indoxacarb from food and water will utilize 35% of the cPAD for all
infants less than 1-year old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. EPA has concluded the combined long-term food,
water, and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 260 (food,
water, and residential) for children aged 1-2. Because EPA's level of
concern for indoxacarb is a MOE of 100 or below, this MOEs is not of
concern. For adults, residential inhalation exposures cannot be
aggregated because they are based on different effects than for oral
exposures. Therefore, long-term aggregate risk for adults is equivalent
to the chronic dietary risk noted in this unit.
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). Indoxacarb 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 to children aged 1-2 years
through food and water with short-term residential exposures to
indoxacarb. For adults, residential inhalation exposures cannot be
aggregated because they are based on different effects than for oral
exposures. Therefore, short-term aggregate risk for adults is
equivalent to the chronic risk noted in unit III.E.2.
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 120 (food, water,
and residential) for children aged 1-2. Because EPA's level of concern
for indoxacarb is a MOE of 100 or below, this MOEs is not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). Indoxacarb is currently registered for uses that could result
in intermediate-term residential exposure, and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure to
children aged 1-2 years through food and water with intermediate-term
residential exposures to indoxacarb. For adults, residential inhalation
exposures cannot be aggregated because they are based on different
effects than for oral exposures. Therefore, intermediate-term aggregate
risk for adults is equivalent to the chronic risk noted above in unit
III.E.2.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for
intermediate-term exposures, EPA has concluded that the combined
intermediate-term food, water, and residential exposures for children
aged 1-2 years result in aggregate MOEs of 260. Because EPA's level of
concern for indoxacarb is a MOE of 100 or below, this MOE is not of
concern.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, indoxacarb is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to indoxacarb residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
For the enforcement of tolerances established on crops, two High
Performance Liquid Chromatograph/Ultraviolet Detection (HPLC/UV)
methods, DuPont protocols AMR 2712-93 and DuPont-11978, are available
for use. The limits of quantitation (LOQs) for these methods range from
0.01 to 0.05 ppm for a variety of plant commodities. A third procedure,
Gas Chromatograph/Mass-Selective Detection (GC/MSD), DuPont method AMR
3493-95 Supplement No. 4, is also available for the confirmation of
residues in plants.
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
[[Page 57866]]
safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section
408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food and
Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards
program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established MRLs in field corn for indoxacarb.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
Based on available data and using the Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development (OECD) maximum residue limit (MRL)
calculation procedures, EPA determined that the appropriate tolerance
level for corn, field, forage is 6.0 ppm. Based on the corn processing
studies, the Agency determined that there is a low level of residue
concentration from processing; therefore, separate tolerances are not
needed for the processed corn commodities of flour, meal, or oil
because these commodities are covered by the tolerance for corn, field,
grain. The ``grain, aspirated fractions'' tolerance does not need to be
modified for field corn because 40 CFR 180.564(a) currently lists a
tolerance level of 45 ppm for ``grain, aspirated fractions,'' and this
tolerance covers potential indoxacarb residues in aspirated grain
fractions derived from corn.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of indoxacarb,
[(S)-methyl 7-chloro-2,5-dihydro-2-[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4-
(trifluoromethoxy)-phenyl] amino]carbonyl]
indeno[1,2e][1,3,4]oxadiazine-4a(3H)-carboxylate], and [(R)-methyl 7
chloro-2,5-dihydro-2[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4-(trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]
amino]carbonyl] indeno [1,2-e][1,3,4] oxadiazine-4a(3H)-carboxylate],
in or on corn, field, forage at 6.0 ppm; corn, field, stover at 15 ppm;
and corn, field, grain at 0.02 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: November 22, 2017.
Michael Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. In Sec. 180.564, add alphabetically the entries for ``Corn, field,
forage'', ``Corn, field, grain'', and ``Corn, field, stover'' to the
table in paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.564 Indoxacarb; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Corn, field, forage..................................... 6.0
Corn, field, grain...................................... 0.02
Corn, field, stover..................................... 15
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-26517 Filed 12-7-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P