Kasugamycin; Pesticide Tolerances, 9442-9446 [2018-04529]
Download as PDF
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
9442
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
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); nor is it considered a
regulatory action under Executive Order
13771, entitled ‘‘Reducing Regulations
and Controlling Regulatory Costs’’ (82
FR 9339, February 3, 2017). 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 exemption in this action,
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. As a result,
this action does not alter the
relationships or distribution of power
and responsibilities established by
Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such,
EPA 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, EPA 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
EPA’s 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).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:02 Mar 05, 2018
Jkt 244001
V. 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: February 23, 2018.
Richard Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, 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. Add § 180.1353 to subpart D to read
as follows:
■
§ 180.1353 Lipochitooligosaccharide
(LCO) SP104; exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance.
Residues of the biochemical pesticide
Lipochitooligosaccharide (LCO) SP104
(which has been used in accordance
with label directions and good
agricultural practices) are exempt from
the requirement of a tolerance in or on
all food commodities.
[FR Doc. 2018–04534 Filed 3–5–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–0519; FRL–9972–96]
Kasugamycin; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of kasugamycin
in or on the cherry subgroup 12–12A
and walnut. The Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR–4) requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
March 6, 2018. Objections and requests
for hearings must be received on or
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
before May 7, 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–2016–0519, 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, Director,
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.
To access the OCSPP test guidelines
referenced in this document
E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM
06MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
electronically, please go to https://
www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ‘‘Test
Methods and Guidelines.’’
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2016–0519 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 May 7, 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–
2016–0519, 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 6E8450) by IR–4, Rutgers,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:02 Mar 05, 2018
Jkt 244001
The State University of New Jersey, 500
College Road East, Suite 201W,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.614 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the fungicide kasugamycin,
(3-O-[2-amino-4-[(carboxyiminomethyl)amino]-2,3,4,6-tetradeoxy-a-Darabino-hexopyranosyl]-D-chiroinositol, in or on fruit, stone, subgroup
12–12A at 0.6 parts per million (ppm)
and walnut at 0.04 ppm. That document
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Arysta LifeScience North
America, LLC, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
In accordance with EPA’s significance
figures policy, as discussed in Unit
IV.C., the established tolerance for
cherry subgroup 12–12A is adjusted
slightly from the petition request.
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 kasugamycin
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with kasugamycin follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
9443
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.
Kasugamycin is an aminoglycoside
antibiotic pesticide with limited activity
against some plant bacterial and fungal
pathogens. There are no human or
veterinary therapeutic applications due
to low efficacy, but at one time was used
clinically in Japan to treat Pseudomonas
kidney infections in humans (Shuwirth
et al. (2006) Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol.
13(10):879–886). The mode of action is
distinct from other aminoglycosides
such as streptomycin, which also has
pesticidal uses. Kasugamycin inhibits
formation of the 30S ribosomal subunit
at initiation of protein synthesis by
perturbing the mRNA-tRNA codon/
anticodon interaction; other
aminoglycoside antibiotics bind to the
30S ribosomal subunit, but disrupt
translation of mRNA at later stages of
initiation.
The primary target organs identified
for kasugamycin were the testes and
kidney. These effects were seen at
higher dose levels, generally at the
highest dose tested (HDT). In the rat
combined chronic toxicity/
carcinogenicity study, an increased
incidence and severity of testicular
tubular atrophy was observed at
histopathological evaluations at 6, 12
and 24 months. Testicular degeneration
and atrophy were also observed in adult
F1 males in the rat reproductive toxicity
study at the highest dose. Testicular
tubular dilatation and degeneration
were observed in the subchronic mouse
study at a dose that exceeded the limit
dose, but not in the mouse
carcinogenicity study, which tested at
much lower doses. In the dog chronic
toxicity study, testicular inflammation
was reported at the high dose, but was
not accompanied by atrophic or
degenerative changes, and was not
considered a treatment-related adverse
effect.
Kidney toxicity is often associated
with exposure to aminoglycoside
antibiotics. In the rat reproductive
toxicity study, kidney dilatation and
increased incidence of chronic
progressive nephropathy were observed
in F1 males. In the subchronic rat study,
increased incidence of eosinophilic
bodies (slight severity) in the renal
proximal tubular cells was reported in
males at several dose levels. These
effects were considered treatmentrelated but not adverse due to the low
severity and lack of associated findings.
E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM
06MRR1
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
9444
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
However, in female rats, increased
epithelial cells in the urinary sediment,
along with decreased urine pH (also
seen in males), was considered evidence
of possible kidney toxicity. Slight
lipofuscin deposition in the rat
combined chronic toxicity/
carcinogenicity study was not
considered adverse due to the lack of
other related findings (this study tested
up to the NOAEL of the subchronic
study). The rat metabolism study
indicated higher levels of radioactivity
in the kidneys than other tissues. In the
subchronic mouse study, minimal to
severe basophilia/hyperplasia in the
renal pars recta in females was
observed. No renal effects were seen in
the mouse carcinogenicity study or in
the dog.
Kasugamycin caused decreased body
weight and/or weight gain in subchronic
studies in the rat, mouse and dog. The
chronic studies, which tested at lower
doses, did not show body weight effects.
Decreased body weight was also
observed in developmental and
reproductive studies in the rat and the
range-finding study for the rabbit
developmental study. Body weight
effects in the mouse immunotoxicity
study were observed only at a dose
exceeding the limit dose.
Kasugamycin appears to be irritating
to the oral and gastrointestinal tract
mucosa. Anal lesions and perianal/
perigenital staining were observed in
the subchronic mouse study. Red and
swollen skin around the anal opening,
and inflammation and ulceration of the
rectum, were noted in male and female
rats of both generations in the 2generation reproduction study. In the rat
developmental toxicity study, distention
of the large intestine with stool in the
cecum, and an increased incidence of
loose stool, were reported. Similar
findings were seen in the rabbit
developmental range-finding study
among females that died or were
sacrificed in extremis. These effects may
be related to the acidity (or other irritant
property) of the active ingredient, which
is primarily excreted unabsorbed and
un-metabolized in the feces. In the dog,
tongue and mouth lesions were reported
at the highest dose tested in the
subchronic toxicity study (but not the
chronic study, which tested at a lower
dose). Systemic effects were not
observed in the rat 21-day dermal study
at doses up to the limit dose, but local
dermal irritation was observed.
The available studies, including rat
acute and subchronic neurobehavioral
screening studies, did not show
evidence of neurotoxicity. A 28-day
mouse immunotoxicity study did not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:02 Mar 05, 2018
Jkt 244001
show evidence of immune system
effects.
There was no evidence of increased
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility
in rat or rabbit developmental toxicity
studies, or in the rat reproductive study.
No developmental effects were seen in
the rat developmental study up to doses
causing maternal toxicity (decreased
body weight gain, food consumption,
and feed efficiency). No maternal or
developmental toxicity was observed in
the main rabbit developmental toxicity
study, in the dose range-finding study,
but maternal weight loss, reduced food
consumption during dosing and
abortions (GD 18 or later) were observed
at higher doses. Fetal weight was
decreased at the maternally toxic dose,
but could not be evaluated at higher
doses due to maternal death and
abortions. In the rat reproductive
toxicity study, parental toxicity
included decreased body weight/weight
gain. No offspring toxicity was
observed. Reproductive toxicity at the
highest dose tested (above the parental
LOAEL) included testicular atrophy,
decreased fertility and fecundity in the
F1 parents for both litters, and an
increased pre-coital interval during the
F2b litter mating period.
Kasugamycin is classified as ‘‘not
likely to be carcinogenic to humans,’’
based on lack of evidence of
carcinogenicity in rat and mouse
carcinogenicity studies. There was no
evidence of genotoxicity.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by kasugamycin 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 document
titled ‘‘Kasugamycin. Human Health
Risk Assessment for the Proposed
Section 3 Registration of New Uses of
the Antibiotic Fungicide on Cherry
Subgroup 12–12A and Walnuts’’ on
pages 30–39 in docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPP–2016–0519.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 kasugamycin used for human risk
assessment is discussed in Unit III.B of
the final rule published in the Federal
Register of August 29, 2014 (79 FR
51492) (FRL–9911–57).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to kasugamycin, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing kasugamycin tolerances in 40
CFR 180.614. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from kasugamycin 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.
No such effects were identified in the
toxicological studies for kasugamycin;
therefore, a quantitative acute dietary
exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the United Stated Department of
Agriculture (USDA) National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We
Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA;
2003–2008). As to residue levels in
food, EPA assumed tolerance level
residues and 100% crop treated for all
registered and proposed crops.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that kasugamycin does not
pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore,
a dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM
06MRR1
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did
not use anticipated residue or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for kasugamycin. 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 kasugamycin in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
kasugamycin. 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 Pesticide Root Zone
Model 5/Variable Volume Water Model
(VVWM) and Pesticide Root Zone
Model Ground Water (PRZM GW), the
estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) of kasugamycin for chronic
exposures are estimated to be 1.63 parts
per billion (ppb) for surface water and
41.71 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration value of 41.71 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).
Kasugamycin is not registered for any
specific use patterns that would result
in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found kasugamycin to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
kasugamycin does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that kasugamycin does not
have a common mechanism of toxicity
with other substances. For information
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:02 Mar 05, 2018
Jkt 244001
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 website at https://
www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/cumulativeassessment-risk-pesticides.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
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 increased
quantitative or qualitative pre- and/or
postnatal susceptibility in
developmental toxicity studies in two
species, or the rat 2-generation
reproductive toxicity study. Abortions
and a reduction in fetal body weight in
the rabbit developmental toxicity rangefinding study were considered
secondary to maternal toxicity (weight
loss, and decreased food consumption).
No toxicity to offspring was observed in
the rat reproductive toxicity study.
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
kasugamycin is complete.
ii. There is no indication that
kasugamycin 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
kasugamycin 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
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
9445
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to kasugamycin
in drinking water. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by kasugamycin.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account acute
exposure estimates from dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, kasugamycin is not
expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to kasugamycin
from food and water will utilize 4.2% of
the cPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses
for kasugamycin.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Because there are no
residential uses, kasugamycin is not
expected to pose a short-term risk.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level.
Because there are no residential uses,
kasugamycin is not expected to pose an
intermediate-term risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
kasugamycin 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
E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM
06MRR1
9446
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 6, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
from aggregate exposure to kasugamycin
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An approved tolerance enforcement
method for crops is available for
kasugamycin using a reverse-phase, ion
pairing HPLC/UV method (Morse
Laboratories Method #Meth-146,
Revision #4) for collecting data and
enforcing tolerances for kasugamycin in
plant commodities. The method may be
requested from: Chief, Analytical
Chemistry Branch, Environmental
Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft.
Meade, MD 20755–5350; telephone
number: (410) 305–2905; email address:
residuemethods@epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established a MRL
for kasugamycin.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
In establishing the tolerance for
cherry subgroup 12–12A, EPA added a
significant figure (0.60 ppm rather than
the proposed 0.6 ppm). This is in order
to avoid the situation where rounding of
an observed residue to the level of
precision of the tolerance expression
would be considered non-violative
(such as 0.64 ppm being rounded to 0.6
ppm).
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of kasugamycin, (3-O-[2amino-4-[(carboxyimino-methyl)amino]2,3,4,6-tetradeoxy-a-D-arabinohexopyranosyl]-D-chiro-inositol), in or
on cherry subgroup 12–12A at 0.60 ppm
and walnut at 0.04 ppm.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:02 Mar 05, 2018
Jkt 244001
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); Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997); or Executive Order
13771, entitled ‘‘Reducing Regulations
and Controlling Regulatory Costs’’ (82
FR 9339, February 3, 2017). 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 tolerances 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
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
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: February 23, 2018.
Michael L. 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 § 180.614, add alphabetically the
entries ‘‘Cherry subgroup 12–12A’’; and
‘‘Walnut’’ to the table in paragraph (a)
to read as follows:
■
§ 180.614 Kasugamycin; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
Cherry subgroup 12–12A ...........
0.60
*
*
*
*
Walnut .........................................
*
0.04
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2018–04529 Filed 3–5–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM
06MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9442-9446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04529]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0519; FRL-9972-96]
Kasugamycin; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
kasugamycin in or on the cherry subgroup 12-12A and walnut. The
Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective March 6, 2018. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before May 7, 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-2016-0519, 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, Director,
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.
To access the OCSPP test guidelines referenced in this document
[[Page 9443]]
electronically, please go to https://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ``Test
Methods and Guidelines.''
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0519 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
May 7, 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-2016-0519, 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
6E8450) by IR-4, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 500
College Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.614 be amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the fungicide kasugamycin, (3-O-[2-amino-4-[(carboxyimino-
methyl)amino]-2,3,4,6-tetradeoxy-[alpha]-D-arabino-hexopyranosyl]-D-
chiro-inositol, in or on fruit, stone, subgroup 12-12A at 0.6 parts per
million (ppm) and walnut at 0.04 ppm. That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by Arysta LifeScience North America,
LLC, the registrant, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
In accordance with EPA's significance figures policy, as discussed
in Unit IV.C., the established tolerance for cherry subgroup 12-12A is
adjusted slightly from the petition request.
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 kasugamycin including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with kasugamycin 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.
Kasugamycin is an aminoglycoside antibiotic pesticide with limited
activity against some plant bacterial and fungal pathogens. There are
no human or veterinary therapeutic applications due to low efficacy,
but at one time was used clinically in Japan to treat Pseudomonas
kidney infections in humans (Shuwirth et al. (2006) Nat. Struct. Mol.
Biol. 13(10):879-886). The mode of action is distinct from other
aminoglycosides such as streptomycin, which also has pesticidal uses.
Kasugamycin inhibits formation of the 30S ribosomal subunit at
initiation of protein synthesis by perturbing the mRNA-tRNA codon/
anticodon interaction; other aminoglycoside antibiotics bind to the 30S
ribosomal subunit, but disrupt translation of mRNA at later stages of
initiation.
The primary target organs identified for kasugamycin were the
testes and kidney. These effects were seen at higher dose levels,
generally at the highest dose tested (HDT). In the rat combined chronic
toxicity/carcinogenicity study, an increased incidence and severity of
testicular tubular atrophy was observed at histopathological
evaluations at 6, 12 and 24 months. Testicular degeneration and atrophy
were also observed in adult F1 males in the rat reproductive toxicity
study at the highest dose. Testicular tubular dilatation and
degeneration were observed in the subchronic mouse study at a dose that
exceeded the limit dose, but not in the mouse carcinogenicity study,
which tested at much lower doses. In the dog chronic toxicity study,
testicular inflammation was reported at the high dose, but was not
accompanied by atrophic or degenerative changes, and was not considered
a treatment-related adverse effect.
Kidney toxicity is often associated with exposure to aminoglycoside
antibiotics. In the rat reproductive toxicity study, kidney dilatation
and increased incidence of chronic progressive nephropathy were
observed in F1 males. In the subchronic rat study, increased incidence
of eosinophilic bodies (slight severity) in the renal proximal tubular
cells was reported in males at several dose levels. These effects were
considered treatment-related but not adverse due to the low severity
and lack of associated findings.
[[Page 9444]]
However, in female rats, increased epithelial cells in the urinary
sediment, along with decreased urine pH (also seen in males), was
considered evidence of possible kidney toxicity. Slight lipofuscin
deposition in the rat combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study
was not considered adverse due to the lack of other related findings
(this study tested up to the NOAEL of the subchronic study). The rat
metabolism study indicated higher levels of radioactivity in the
kidneys than other tissues. In the subchronic mouse study, minimal to
severe basophilia/hyperplasia in the renal pars recta in females was
observed. No renal effects were seen in the mouse carcinogenicity study
or in the dog.
Kasugamycin caused decreased body weight and/or weight gain in
subchronic studies in the rat, mouse and dog. The chronic studies,
which tested at lower doses, did not show body weight effects.
Decreased body weight was also observed in developmental and
reproductive studies in the rat and the range-finding study for the
rabbit developmental study. Body weight effects in the mouse
immunotoxicity study were observed only at a dose exceeding the limit
dose.
Kasugamycin appears to be irritating to the oral and
gastrointestinal tract mucosa. Anal lesions and perianal/perigenital
staining were observed in the subchronic mouse study. Red and swollen
skin around the anal opening, and inflammation and ulceration of the
rectum, were noted in male and female rats of both generations in the
2-generation reproduction study. In the rat developmental toxicity
study, distention of the large intestine with stool in the cecum, and
an increased incidence of loose stool, were reported. Similar findings
were seen in the rabbit developmental range-finding study among females
that died or were sacrificed in extremis. These effects may be related
to the acidity (or other irritant property) of the active ingredient,
which is primarily excreted unabsorbed and un-metabolized in the feces.
In the dog, tongue and mouth lesions were reported at the highest dose
tested in the subchronic toxicity study (but not the chronic study,
which tested at a lower dose). Systemic effects were not observed in
the rat 21-day dermal study at doses up to the limit dose, but local
dermal irritation was observed.
The available studies, including rat acute and subchronic
neurobehavioral screening studies, did not show evidence of
neurotoxicity. A 28-day mouse immunotoxicity study did not show
evidence of immune system effects.
There was no evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative
susceptibility in rat or rabbit developmental toxicity studies, or in
the rat reproductive study. No developmental effects were seen in the
rat developmental study up to doses causing maternal toxicity
(decreased body weight gain, food consumption, and feed efficiency). No
maternal or developmental toxicity was observed in the main rabbit
developmental toxicity study, in the dose range-finding study, but
maternal weight loss, reduced food consumption during dosing and
abortions (GD 18 or later) were observed at higher doses. Fetal weight
was decreased at the maternally toxic dose, but could not be evaluated
at higher doses due to maternal death and abortions. In the rat
reproductive toxicity study, parental toxicity included decreased body
weight/weight gain. No offspring toxicity was observed. Reproductive
toxicity at the highest dose tested (above the parental LOAEL) included
testicular atrophy, decreased fertility and fecundity in the F1 parents
for both litters, and an increased pre-coital interval during the F2b
litter mating period.
Kasugamycin is classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic to
humans,'' based on lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in rat and mouse
carcinogenicity studies. There was no evidence of genotoxicity.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by kasugamycin 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 ``Kasugamycin. Human Health
Risk Assessment for the Proposed Section 3 Registration of New Uses of
the Antibiotic Fungicide on Cherry Subgroup 12-12A and Walnuts'' on
pages 30-39 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0519.
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
kasugamycin used for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B
of the final rule published in the Federal Register of August 29, 2014
(79 FR 51492) (FRL-9911-57).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to kasugamycin, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing kasugamycin tolerances in 40 CFR
180.614. EPA assessed dietary exposures from kasugamycin 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.
No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for
kasugamycin; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the United Stated
Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA; 2003-2008).
As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed tolerance level residues and
100% crop treated for all registered and proposed crops.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that kasugamycin does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
[[Page 9445]]
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue or PCT information in the dietary
assessment for kasugamycin. 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 kasugamycin in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of kasugamycin. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model 5/Variable Volume Water
Model (VVWM) and Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM GW), the
estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of kasugamycin for
chronic exposures are estimated to be 1.63 parts per billion (ppb) for
surface water and 41.71 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 41.71 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).
Kasugamycin is not registered for any specific use patterns that
would result in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found kasugamycin to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and kasugamycin does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
kasugamycin 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 website 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
increased quantitative or qualitative pre- and/or postnatal
susceptibility in developmental toxicity studies in two species, or the
rat 2-generation reproductive toxicity study. Abortions and a reduction
in fetal body weight in the rabbit developmental toxicity range-finding
study were considered secondary to maternal toxicity (weight loss, and
decreased food consumption). No toxicity to offspring was observed in
the rat reproductive toxicity study.
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 kasugamycin is complete.
ii. There is no indication that kasugamycin 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 kasugamycin 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 kasugamycin in drinking water. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by kasugamycin.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
kasugamycin is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
kasugamycin from food and water will utilize 4.2% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for kasugamycin.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Because there
are no residential uses, kasugamycin is not expected to pose a short-
term risk.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level. Because there are no residential uses, kasugamycin is not
expected to pose an intermediate-term risk.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, kasugamycin 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
[[Page 9446]]
from aggregate exposure to kasugamycin residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An approved tolerance enforcement method for crops is available for
kasugamycin using a reverse-phase, ion pairing HPLC/UV method (Morse
Laboratories Method #Meth-146, Revision #4) for collecting data and
enforcing tolerances for kasugamycin in plant commodities. 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:
[email protected].
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established a MRL for kasugamycin.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
In establishing the tolerance for cherry subgroup 12-12A, EPA added
a significant figure (0.60 ppm rather than the proposed 0.6 ppm). This
is in order to avoid the situation where rounding of an observed
residue to the level of precision of the tolerance expression would be
considered non-violative (such as 0.64 ppm being rounded to 0.6 ppm).
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of kasugamycin,
(3-O-[2-amino-4-[(carboxyimino-methyl)amino]-2,3,4,6-tetradeoxy-
[alpha]-D-arabino-hexopyranosyl]-D-chiro-inositol), in or on cherry
subgroup 12-12A at 0.60 ppm and walnut at 0.04 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); Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); or Executive Order 13771,
entitled ``Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs'' (82
FR 9339, February 3, 2017). 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 tolerances 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: February 23, 2018.
Michael L. 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. 180.614, add alphabetically the entries ``Cherry subgroup
12-12A''; and ``Walnut'' to the table in paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 180.614 Kasugamycin; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cherry subgroup 12-12A...................................... 0.60
* * * * *
Walnut...................................................... 0.04
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-04529 Filed 3-5-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P