Tolfenpyrad; Pesticide Tolerances, 65546-65551 [2018-27605]
Download as PDF
65546
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 245 / Friday, December 21, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
identified and discussed later in this
document. Interregional Research
Environmental protection,
Project No. 4 (IR–4) requested these
Administrative practice and procedure,
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
requirements.
December 21, 2018. Objections and
Dated: December 6, 2018,
requests for hearings must be received
Michael Goodis,
on or before February 19, 2019 and must
Director, Registration Division, Office of
be filed in accordance with the
Pesticide Programs.
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
amended as follows:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,
PART 180—[AMENDED]
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0587, is
■ 1. The authority citation for part 180
available at https://www.regulations.gov
continues to read as follows:
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket)
in the Environmental Protection Agency
■ 2. In § 180.546:
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William
■ i. Remove the entry ‘‘Kiwifruit’’ from
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
the table in paragraph (a).
■ ii. Add alphabetically the entries
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC
‘‘Cacao, dried bean’’; ‘‘Fruit, small, vine 20460–0001. The Public Reading Room
climbing, except grape, subgroup 13–
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
07E’’; ‘‘Wasabi, stem’’; and ‘‘Wasabi,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
tops’’ to the table in paragraph (a).
holidays. The telephone number for the
The additions read as follows:
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the OPP
§ 180.546 Mefenoxam; tolerances for
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
residues.
the visitor instructions and additional
(a) * * *
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
Parts per
Commodity
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
million
Michael Goodis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
*
*
*
*
*
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
Cacao, dried bean ....................
0.20
20460–0001; main telephone number:
(703) 305–7090; email address:
*
*
*
*
*
RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Fruit, small, vine climbing, exList of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
cept grape, subgroup 13–07E
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
0.10
I. General Information
*
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
Wasabi, stem ............................
3.0
Wasabi, tops .............................
6.0 this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
*
*
*
*
*
list of North American Industrial
[FR Doc. 2018–27764 Filed 12–20–18; 8:45 am]
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
determine whether this document
AGENCY
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
40 CFR Part 180
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0587; FRL–9987–34]
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
Tolfenpyrad; Pesticide Tolerances
311).
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
Agency (EPA).
code 32532).
ACTION: Final rule.
B. How can I get electronic access to
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of tolfenpyrad in
or on multiple commodities which are
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:23 Dec 20, 2018
Jkt 247001
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
electronically, please go to https://
www.epa.gov/aboutepa/about-officechemical-safety-and-pollutionprevention-ocspp.
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–2017–0587 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 19, 2019. 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–
2017–0587, 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/where-sendcomments-epa-dockets.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 245 / Friday, December 21, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
In the Federal Register of January 26,
2018 (83 FR 3658) (FRL–9971–46), 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 7E8613) by IR–4, Rutgers,
The State University of New Jersey, 500
College Road East, Suite 201 W,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.675 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the insecticide tolfenpyrad,
4-chloro-3-ethyl-1-methyl-N-[4-(ptolyloxy)benzyl]pyrazole-5carboxamide), in or on Arugula at 30.0
parts per million (ppm); Avocado at 1.5
ppm; Berry, low growing, subgroup 13–
07G, except Cranberry and Blueberry,
lowbush at 3.0 ppm; Bushberry,
subgroup 13–07B at 7.0 ppm; Caneberry,
subgroup 13–07A at 7.0 ppm; Celtuce at
30.0 ppm; Cottonseed, subgroup 20C at
0.70 ppm; Florence fennel at 30.0 ppm;
Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy
kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F at 2.0 ppm;
Garden cress at 30.0 ppm; Leaf petiole
vegetable, subgroup 22B at 30.0 ppm;
Leafy greens, subgroup 4–16A at 30.0
ppm; Onion, bulb, subgroup 3–07A at
0.09 ppm; Onion, green, subgroup 3–
07B at 10.0 ppm; Upland cress at 30.0
ppm; Vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10 at
1.0 ppm; and Vegetable, tuberous and
corm, subgroup 1C at 0.01 ppm.
The petitioner also requested that the
following established tolerances be
removed upon establishment of the
petitioned-for tolerances: Cotton,
undelinted seed at 0.70 ppm; Grape at
2.0 ppm; Potato at 0.01 ppm; and
Vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group
4 at 30.0 ppm. That document
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Nichino America, Inc., the
registrant, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
Although a comment was submitted to
the docket for the notice of filing, the
issue raised is outside the scope of this
rulemaking.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing the petitioned-for
tolerances with some variations
consistent with its authority in FFDCA
section 408(d)(4)(A). The reasons for
these variations are explained 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.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:23 Dec 20, 2018
Jkt 247001
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 tolfenpyrad
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with tolfenpyrad 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.
A variety of toxic effects were noted
in the toxicology database for
tolfenpyrad. However, the most
consistent findings across species and
studies were effects on bodyweight and
bodyweight gain which were observed
in adults of all species (rat, mice, rabbit,
and dog) in the majority of the
subchronic oral and dermal toxicity
studies, and all chronic toxicity studies.
Further detail of the toxicological
profile for tolfenpyrad is discussed in
Unit III.A. of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of June 22, 2018
(83 FR 29017) (FRL–9976–21).
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by tolfenpyrad as well as
the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in document
‘‘Tolfenpyrad-Aggregate Human Health
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
65547
Risk Assessment for Section 3 New Use
Requests and Crop Group Tolerance
Conversions’’ on page 31 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0587.
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://
www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for tolfenpyrad used for
human risk assessment is discussed in
Unit III B. of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of June 22, 2018
(83 FR 29020) (FRL–9976–21).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to tolfenpyrad, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing tolfenpyrad tolerances in 40
CFR 180.675. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from tolfenpyrad 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
tolfenpyrad. In estimating acute dietary
exposure, EPA used the Dietary
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
65548
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 245 / Friday, December 21, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Exposure Evaluation Model DEEM–
FCIDTM (Ver. 3.16). This model uses
food consumption data from the 2003–
2008 United States Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA) National Health
and Nutrition Examination Survey,
What We Eat in America (NHANES/
WWEIA). As to residue levels in food,
EPA used tolerance-level residues for all
foods and assumed 100% crop treated
(PCT) for all current and proposed
crops. The assessment was refined with
the application of empirical processing
factors where available. Where
empirical processing factors were not
available or were not translated, default
processing factors were used.
Additional refinements include a factor
to account for the reduction in residues
when wrapper leaves are removed (head
lettuce, radicchio, cabbage, Chinese
Napa cabbage, and Brussels sprouts).
Empirical processing factors were
available for processed commodities of
apple, orange, cottonseed, grape, plum,
potato and tomato, and were translated
to other processed commodities where
appropriate. Where empirical
processing factors were not available or
were not translated, default processing
factors were used.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, EPA used the DEEM–
FCIDTM (Ver. 3.16). This model uses
food consumption data from the 2003–
2008 USDA’s NHANES/WWEIA. As to
residue levels in food, EPA assumed
100% PCT and average residue levels
from crop field trials as well as the
refinements described above for the
acute assessment.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that tolfenpyrad does not
pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore,
a dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information.
Although EPA did not use any percent
crop treated estimates for this action,
the Agency relied on average residue
information. 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 CallIns as are required by FFDCA section
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:23 Dec 20, 2018
Jkt 247001
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.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for tolfenpyrad in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of tolfenpyrad.
Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-scienceand-assessing-pesticide-risks/aboutwater-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone
Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening
Concentration in Ground Water (SCI–
GROW) models, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of
tolfenpyrad for acute exposures are
estimated to be 26.9 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 11.0 ppb for
ground water. Chronic exposures for
non-cancer assessments are estimated to
be 12.2 ppb for surface water and 11.0
ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
acute dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value of 26.9 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration
value of 12.2 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).
Tolfenpyrad is not registered for any
specific use patterns that would result
in residential exposure. Further
information regarding EPA standard
assumptions and generic inputs for
residential exposures may be found at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-scienceand-assessing-pesticide-risks/standardoperating-procedures-residentialpesticide.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found tolfenpyrad to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
tolfenpyrad does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that tolfenpyrad 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://
www.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.
Although there is evidence of increased
qualitative susceptibility in the young in
the developmental immunotoxicity
study (DIT) in rats, there is low concern,
and there are no residual uncertainties
regarding increased quantitative or
qualitative pre- and/or postnatal
susceptibility for tolfenpyrad. When the
DIT study is considered along with the
reproduction study, the offspring
toxicity in the DIT study was observed
at the same dose as comparable
maternal toxicity (moribundity/
mortality) was observed in the
reproduction study. Therefore, EPA
does not consider the isolated incident
in the DIT a true indicator of qualitative
susceptibility. Additionally, the effects
observed in the DIT study are well
characterized, a clear NOAEL was
identified, and the endpoints chosen for
risk assessment are protective of
potential offspring effects.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 245 / Friday, December 21, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for
tolfenpyrad is complete.
ii. There is no indication that
tolfenpyrad is a neurotoxic chemical
and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. While there was evidence of
qualitative susceptibility in one study,
the Agency’s concern for the
susceptibility is low because it was not
observed in other studies with
tolfenpyrad; offspring effects
consistently occurred at or above the
dose associated with significant
maternal toxicity; there was a clear
NOAEL/LOAEL; and endpoints and
doses selected for risk assessment are
protective of the susceptibility.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
with regard to the exposure assessment.
The acute dietary exposure assessment
is based on high-end health protective
residue levels (that account for parent
and metabolites of concern), processing
factors, and percent crop treated
assumptions (100%). The chronic
dietary assessment incorporates some
refinement in that average residue
values were used. For both the acute
and chronic dietary exposure, actual
exposures to tolfenpyrad will likely be
lower than the estimated exposures.
Furthermore, conservative, upper-bound
assumptions were used to estimate
exposure through drinking water, such
that these exposures have not been
underestimated. No residential
exposures are expected. These
assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by
tolfenpyrad.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
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
tolfenpyrad will occupy 63% of the
aPAD for children 1–2 years of age, the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:23 Dec 20, 2018
Jkt 247001
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 tolfenpyrad
from food and water will utilize 97% of
the cPAD for children 1–2 years of age,
the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. There are no
residential uses for tolfenpyrad.
3. Short-and Intermediate-term risk.
Short- and intermediate-term aggregate
exposures take into account short- and
intermediate-term residential exposures
plus chronic exposures to food and
water (considered to be background
exposure levels). Short- and
intermediate-term adverse effects were
identified; however, tolfenpyrad is not
registered for any use patterns that
would result in short- or intermediateterm residential exposures. Short- and
intermediate-term risks are assessed
based on short- and intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there are no
short- or intermediate-term residential
exposures and chronic dietary exposure
has already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess short- and intermediate-term
risk), no further assessment of shortand intermediate-term risk is necessary,
and EPA relies on the chronic dietary
risk assessment for evaluating short- and
intermediate-term risk for tolfenpyrad.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
tolfenpyrad is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
5. 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 tolfenpyrad
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodologies
utilizing high-performance liquid
chromatography method with tandem
mass spectrometry detection (LC/MS/
MS) is available for enforcement of
tolfenpyrad residue tolerances in/on
plant commodities (Morse Laboratories
Analytical Method #Meth-183, Revision
#2). For livestock, a method described
in PTRL West Study No. 1841W is
available. The livestock method
adequately determines residues of
tolfenpyrad and its metabolites, PT–CA,
OH–PT–CA, and PCA in milk, bovine
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
65549
meat, kidney, liver and fat. Residues are
determined by LC/MS/MS analysis.
These methods are adequate to enforce
the tolerance expression.
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 established an MRL for
tolfenpyrad on potato at 0.01 ppm. Due
to crop group conversions, the
established potato tolerance will be
covered by Vegetable, tuberous and
corm, subgroup 1C. Therefore, the
Codex MRL for potato is harmonized
with the U.S. tolerance for Vegetable,
tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.01
ppm.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
The petitioner requested tolerances
for residues of tolfenpyrad and cited the
International Union of Pure and
Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) name for
the chemical. The residue definition for
tolfenpyrad tolerances currently
established under 40 CFR 180.675
complies with the Agency’s Guidance
on Tolerance Expressions, except that
the IUPAC chemical name is listed
rather than the Chemical Abstracts
Service (CAS) chemical name. The
Agency’s practice is to use the CAS
name; therefore, the tolerance
expression is being revised. This change
also results in harmonization of the
chemical name expression with that
used by the Pest Management
Regulatory Agency (PMRA).
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
65550
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 245 / Friday, December 21, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
EPA reviewed the current residue
data and tolerance conversion proposals
and is establishing some the proposed
tolerance levels for residues of
tolfenpyrad in accordance with the
Agency’s rounding practice. In addition,
using the highest overall average residue
level from the greenhouse tomato
decline trial (at a post-harvest interval
(PHI) of 5 days instead of a PHI of 1
day), the Agency is establishing a
tolerance for Vegetable, fruiting, group
8–10 at 1.5 ppm instead of 1.0 ppm.
While the petitioner requested
individual tolerances for arugula,
garden cress, and upland cress,
individual tolerances are not necessary
since these commodities are included in
Brassica, leafy greens, subgroup 4–16B.
Finally, the Agency is establishing a
tolerance for the requested commodity
Florence fennel as a tolerance for
Fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and stalk
to conform to the Agency’s preferred
vocabulary for this commodity.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of tolfenpyrad, (4-chloro-3ethyl-1-methyl-N-[[4-(4methylphenoxy)phenyl]methyl]-1Hpyrazole-5-carboxamide), including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on
Avocado at 1.5 ppm; Berry, low
growing, subgroup 13–07G, except
cranberry and lowbush blueberry at 3.0
ppm; Bushberry subgroup 13–07B at 7.0
ppm; Caneberry subgroup 13–07A at 7.0
ppm; Celtuce at 30 ppm; Cottonseed
subgroup 20C at 0.70 ppm; Fennel,
Florence, fresh leaves and stalk at 30
ppm; Fruit, small, vine climbing, except
fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F at 2.0
ppm; Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup
22B at 30 ppm; Leafy greens subgroup
4–16A at 30 ppm; Onion, bulb,
subgroup 3–07A at 0.09 ppm; Onion,
green, subgroup 3–07B at 10 ppm;
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10 at 1.5
ppm; and Vegetable, tuberous and corm,
subgroup 1C at 0.01 ppm. In addition,
EPA is removing the following
tolerances from paragraph (a) as they are
superseded by the new tolerances being
established in this rulemaking Cotton,
undelinted seed at 0.70 ppm; Grape at
2.0 ppm; Potato at 0.01 ppm; and
Vegetable, leafy except Brassica, group
4 at 30.0 ppm. EPA is also removing the
time-limited tolerance for onion, dry
bulb at 0.09 ppm in § 180.675(b) as it is
no longer needed with the
establishment of a new permanent
tolerance for onion, bulb subgroup 3–
07A in paragraph (a)(1).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:23 Dec 20, 2018
Jkt 247001
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), 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 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
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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: December 10, 2018.
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 § 180.675:
a. Revise the introductory text of
paragraph (a)(1);
■ b. In the table to paragraph (a)(1):
■ i. Add alphabetically the entries
‘‘Avocado’’; ‘‘Berry, low growing,
subgroup 13–07G, except cranberry and
lowbush blueberry’’; ‘‘Bushberry,
subgroup 13–07B’’; ‘‘Caneberry,
subgroup 13–07A’’; ‘‘Celtuce’’;
‘‘Cottonseed, subgroup 20C’’; ‘‘Fennel,
Florence, fresh leaves and stalk’’; ‘‘Fruit,
small, vine climbing, except fuzzy
kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F’’; ‘‘Leaf
petiole vegetable subgroup 22B’’; ‘‘Leafy
greens, subgroup 4–16A’’; ‘‘Onion, bulb,
subgroup 3–07A’’; ‘‘Onion, green,
subgroup 3–07B’’; and ‘‘Vegetable,
tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C’’;
■ ii. Revise the entry for ‘‘Vegetable,
fruiting, group 8–10’’;
■ iii. Remove the entries ‘‘Cotton,
undelinted seed’’; ‘‘Grape’’; ‘‘Potato’’;
■
■
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
65551
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 245 / Friday, December 21, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
§ 180.675 Tolfenpyrad; tolerances for
residues.
and ‘‘Vegetable, leafy except Brassica,
group 4’’;
■ c. Revise the introductory text of
paragraph (a)(2);
■ d. Revise paragraph (b).
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are
established for residues of the
insecticide tolfenpyrad, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the table below.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
specified below is to be determined by
measuring only tolfenpyrad (4-chloro-3ethyl-1-methyl-N-[[4-(4methylphenoxy)phenyl]methyl]-1Hpyrazole-5-carboxamide) in or on the
commodity.
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
*
*
Avocado ...............................................................................................................................................................................................
Berry, low growing, subgroup 13–07G, except cranberry and lowbush blueberry .............................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Bushberry, subgroup 13–07B ..............................................................................................................................................................
Caneberry, subgroup 13–07A .............................................................................................................................................................
Celtuce .................................................................................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Cottonseed, subgroup 20C ..................................................................................................................................................................
Fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and stalk ............................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F ..................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B ..................................................................................................................................................
Leafy greens, subgroup 4–16A ...........................................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Onion, bulb, subgroup 3–07A ..............................................................................................................................................................
Onion, green, subgroup 3–07B ...........................................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10 ...........................................................................................................................................................
Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C .....................................................................................................................................
*
(2) Tolerances are established for
residues of the insecticide tolfenpyrad,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities in
the following table. Compliance with
the tolerance levels specified below is to
be determined by measuring only the
sum of tolfenpyrad, 4-chloro-3-ethyl-1methyl-N-[[4-(4methylphenoxy)phenyl]methyl]-1Hpyrazole-5-carboxamide, and its
metabolite 4-[4-[(4-chloro-3-ethyl-1methylpyrazol-5-yl)carbonylaminomethyl]phenoxy]-benzoic acid,
calculated as the stoichiometric
equivalent of tolfenpyrad.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
[Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
[FR Doc. 2018–27605 Filed 12–20–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:23 Dec 20, 2018
Jkt 247001
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 73 and 74
[MB Docket Nos. 18–4, 17–105; FCC 18–
145]
Filing of Contracts
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
eliminates a paper filing requirement for
broadcast station contracts and
documents and instead requires that
these same documents are either
uploaded or listed in the online public
file within 30 days.
DATES: Effective Date: January 22, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Clark, Industry Analysis
Division, Media Bureau, FCC, (202)
418–2609. For additional information
concerning the information collection
requirements contained in the Report
and Order, contact Cathy Williams at
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1.5
3.0
7.0
7.0
30
0.70
30
2.0
30
30
0.09
10
1.5
0.01
(202) 418–2918, or via the internet at
PRA@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Report
and Order, FCC 18–145, in MB Docket
Nos. 18–4 and 17–105, adopted and
released on October 23, 2018. The
complete text of this document is
available electronically via the search
function on the FCC’s Electronic
Document Management System
(EDOCS) web page at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/ (https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/). The
complete document is available for
inspection and copying in the FCC
Reference Information Center, 445 12th
Street SW, Room CY–A257,
Washington, DC 20554 (for hours of
operation, see https://www.fcc.gov/
general/fcc-reference-informationcenter). To request materials in
accessible formats for people with
disabilities (Braille, large print,
electronic files, audio format), send an
email to fcc504@fcc.gov (mail to:
fcc504@fcc.gov) or call the FCC’s
Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice), (202)
418–0432 (TTY).
E:\FR\FM\21DER1.SGM
21DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 245 (Friday, December 21, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65546-65551]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27605]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0587; FRL-9987-34]
Tolfenpyrad; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
tolfenpyrad in or on multiple commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. Interregional Research Project No. 4
(IR-4) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective December 21, 2018. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 19, 2019
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-2017-0587, is available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Goodis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
number: (703) 305-7090; email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl. To access the OCSPP
test guidelines referenced in this document electronically, please go
to https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/about-office-chemical-safety-and-pollution-prevention-ocspp.
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-2017-0587 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 19, 2019. 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-2017-0587, 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/where-send-comments-epa-dockets.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
[[Page 65547]]
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of January 26, 2018 (83 FR 3658) (FRL-9971-
46), 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
7E8613) by IR-4, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 500
College Road East, Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.675 be amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the insecticide tolfenpyrad, 4-chloro-3-ethyl-1-methyl-N-
[4-(p-tolyloxy)benzyl]pyrazole-5-carboxamide), in or on Arugula at 30.0
parts per million (ppm); Avocado at 1.5 ppm; Berry, low growing,
subgroup 13-07G, except Cranberry and Blueberry, lowbush at 3.0 ppm;
Bushberry, subgroup 13-07B at 7.0 ppm; Caneberry, subgroup 13-07A at
7.0 ppm; Celtuce at 30.0 ppm; Cottonseed, subgroup 20C at 0.70 ppm;
Florence fennel at 30.0 ppm; Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy
kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F at 2.0 ppm; Garden cress at 30.0 ppm; Leaf
petiole vegetable, subgroup 22B at 30.0 ppm; Leafy greens, subgroup 4-
16A at 30.0 ppm; Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A at 0.09 ppm; Onion, green,
subgroup 3-07B at 10.0 ppm; Upland cress at 30.0 ppm; Vegetable,
fruiting, group 8-10 at 1.0 ppm; and Vegetable, tuberous and corm,
subgroup 1C at 0.01 ppm.
The petitioner also requested that the following established
tolerances be removed upon establishment of the petitioned-for
tolerances: Cotton, undelinted seed at 0.70 ppm; Grape at 2.0 ppm;
Potato at 0.01 ppm; and Vegetable, leafy, except Brassica, group 4 at
30.0 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared
by Nichino America, Inc., the registrant, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov. Although a comment was submitted to
the docket for the notice of filing, the issue raised is outside the
scope of this rulemaking.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing the petitioned-for tolerances with some variations
consistent with its authority in FFDCA section 408(d)(4)(A). The
reasons for these variations are explained 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 tolfenpyrad including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with tolfenpyrad 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.
A variety of toxic effects were noted in the toxicology database
for tolfenpyrad. However, the most consistent findings across species
and studies were effects on bodyweight and bodyweight gain which were
observed in adults of all species (rat, mice, rabbit, and dog) in the
majority of the subchronic oral and dermal toxicity studies, and all
chronic toxicity studies.
Further detail of the toxicological profile for tolfenpyrad is
discussed in Unit III.A. of the final rule published in the Federal
Register of June 22, 2018 (83 FR 29017) (FRL-9976-21).
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by tolfenpyrad as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in document ``Tolfenpyrad-Aggregate Human Health
Risk Assessment for Section 3 New Use Requests and Crop Group Tolerance
Conversions'' on page 31 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0587.
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://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for tolfenpyrad used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III B. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of June 22, 2018 (83 FR 29020) (FRL-
9976-21).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to tolfenpyrad, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing tolfenpyrad tolerances in 40 CFR
180.675. EPA assessed dietary exposures from tolfenpyrad 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 tolfenpyrad. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used the Dietary
[[Page 65548]]
Exposure Evaluation Model DEEM-FCIDTM (Ver. 3.16). This
model uses food consumption data from the 2003-2008 United States
Department of Agriculture's (USDA) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA used tolerance-level residues for all foods
and assumed 100% crop treated (PCT) for all current and proposed crops.
The assessment was refined with the application of empirical processing
factors where available. Where empirical processing factors were not
available or were not translated, default processing factors were used.
Additional refinements include a factor to account for the reduction in
residues when wrapper leaves are removed (head lettuce, radicchio,
cabbage, Chinese Napa cabbage, and Brussels sprouts). Empirical
processing factors were available for processed commodities of apple,
orange, cottonseed, grape, plum, potato and tomato, and were translated
to other processed commodities where appropriate. Where empirical
processing factors were not available or were not translated, default
processing factors were used.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, EPA used the DEEM-FCIDTM (Ver. 3.16). This model
uses food consumption data from the 2003-2008 USDA's NHANES/WWEIA. As
to residue levels in food, EPA assumed 100% PCT and average residue
levels from crop field trials as well as the refinements described
above for the acute assessment.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that tolfenpyrad does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
Although EPA did not use any percent crop treated estimates for this
action, the Agency relied on average residue information. 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.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for tolfenpyrad in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of tolfenpyrad. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of
tolfenpyrad for acute exposures are estimated to be 26.9 parts per
billion (ppb) for surface water and 11.0 ppb for ground water. Chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 12.2 ppb for
surface water and 11.0 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 26.9 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 12.2 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).
Tolfenpyrad is not registered for any specific use patterns that
would result in residential exposure. Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures may
be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found tolfenpyrad to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and tolfenpyrad does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
tolfenpyrad 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://www.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. Although there is evidence
of increased qualitative susceptibility in the young in the
developmental immunotoxicity study (DIT) in rats, there is low concern,
and there are no residual uncertainties regarding increased
quantitative or qualitative pre- and/or postnatal susceptibility for
tolfenpyrad. When the DIT study is considered along with the
reproduction study, the offspring toxicity in the DIT study was
observed at the same dose as comparable maternal toxicity (moribundity/
mortality) was observed in the reproduction study. Therefore, EPA does
not consider the isolated incident in the DIT a true indicator of
qualitative susceptibility. Additionally, the effects observed in the
DIT study are well characterized, a clear NOAEL was identified, and the
endpoints chosen for risk assessment are protective of potential
offspring effects.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF
[[Page 65549]]
were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for tolfenpyrad is complete.
ii. There is no indication that tolfenpyrad is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. While there was evidence of qualitative susceptibility in one
study, the Agency's concern for the susceptibility is low because it
was not observed in other studies with tolfenpyrad; offspring effects
consistently occurred at or above the dose associated with significant
maternal toxicity; there was a clear NOAEL/LOAEL; and endpoints and
doses selected for risk assessment are protective of the
susceptibility.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties with regard to the exposure
assessment. The acute dietary exposure assessment is based on high-end
health protective residue levels (that account for parent and
metabolites of concern), processing factors, and percent crop treated
assumptions (100%). The chronic dietary assessment incorporates some
refinement in that average residue values were used. For both the acute
and chronic dietary exposure, actual exposures to tolfenpyrad will
likely be lower than the estimated exposures. Furthermore,
conservative, upper-bound assumptions were used to estimate exposure
through drinking water, such that these exposures have not been
underestimated. No residential exposures are expected. These
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by
tolfenpyrad.
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 tolfenpyrad will occupy 63% of the aPAD for children 1-2 years of
age, 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
tolfenpyrad from food and water will utilize 97% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years of age, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for tolfenpyrad.
3. Short-and Intermediate-term risk. Short- and intermediate-term
aggregate exposures take into account short- and intermediate-term
residential exposures plus chronic exposures to food and water
(considered to be background exposure levels). Short- and intermediate-
term adverse effects were identified; however, tolfenpyrad is not
registered for any use patterns that would result in short- or
intermediate-term residential exposures. Short- and intermediate-term
risks are assessed based on short- and intermediate-term residential
exposure plus chronic dietary exposure. Because there are no short- or
intermediate-term residential exposures and chronic dietary exposure
has already been assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD
(which is at least as protective as the POD used to assess short- and
intermediate-term risk), no further assessment of short- and
intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating short- and intermediate-term
risk for tolfenpyrad.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, tolfenpyrad is not expected to pose a cancer risk to humans.
5. 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 tolfenpyrad residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodologies utilizing high-performance
liquid chromatography method with tandem mass spectrometry detection
(LC/MS/MS) is available for enforcement of tolfenpyrad residue
tolerances in/on plant commodities (Morse Laboratories Analytical
Method #Meth-183, Revision #2). For livestock, a method described in
PTRL West Study No. 1841W is available. The livestock method adequately
determines residues of tolfenpyrad and its metabolites, PT-CA, OH-PT-
CA, and PCA in milk, bovine meat, kidney, liver and fat. Residues are
determined by LC/MS/MS analysis. These methods are adequate to enforce
the tolerance expression.
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 established an MRL for tolfenpyrad on potato at 0.01
ppm. Due to crop group conversions, the established potato tolerance
will be covered by Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C.
Therefore, the Codex MRL for potato is harmonized with the U.S.
tolerance for Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.01 ppm.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
The petitioner requested tolerances for residues of tolfenpyrad and
cited the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC)
name for the chemical. The residue definition for tolfenpyrad
tolerances currently established under 40 CFR 180.675 complies with the
Agency's Guidance on Tolerance Expressions, except that the IUPAC
chemical name is listed rather than the Chemical Abstracts Service
(CAS) chemical name. The Agency's practice is to use the CAS name;
therefore, the tolerance expression is being revised. This change also
results in harmonization of the chemical name expression with that used
by the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA).
[[Page 65550]]
EPA reviewed the current residue data and tolerance conversion
proposals and is establishing some the proposed tolerance levels for
residues of tolfenpyrad in accordance with the Agency's rounding
practice. In addition, using the highest overall average residue level
from the greenhouse tomato decline trial (at a post-harvest interval
(PHI) of 5 days instead of a PHI of 1 day), the Agency is establishing
a tolerance for Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 at 1.5 ppm instead of
1.0 ppm.
While the petitioner requested individual tolerances for arugula,
garden cress, and upland cress, individual tolerances are not necessary
since these commodities are included in Brassica, leafy greens,
subgroup 4-16B.
Finally, the Agency is establishing a tolerance for the requested
commodity Florence fennel as a tolerance for Fennel, Florence, fresh
leaves and stalk to conform to the Agency's preferred vocabulary for
this commodity.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of tolfenpyrad,
(4-chloro-3-ethyl-1-methyl-N-[[4-(4-methylphenoxy)phenyl]methyl]-1H-
pyrazole-5-carboxamide), including its metabolites and degradates, in
or on Avocado at 1.5 ppm; Berry, low growing, subgroup 13-07G, except
cranberry and lowbush blueberry at 3.0 ppm; Bushberry subgroup 13-07B
at 7.0 ppm; Caneberry subgroup 13-07A at 7.0 ppm; Celtuce at 30 ppm;
Cottonseed subgroup 20C at 0.70 ppm; Fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and
stalk at 30 ppm; Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit,
subgroup 13-07F at 2.0 ppm; Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B at 30
ppm; Leafy greens subgroup 4-16A at 30 ppm; Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A
at 0.09 ppm; Onion, green, subgroup 3-07B at 10 ppm; Vegetable,
fruiting, group 8-10 at 1.5 ppm; and Vegetable, tuberous and corm,
subgroup 1C at 0.01 ppm. In addition, EPA is removing the following
tolerances from paragraph (a) as they are superseded by the new
tolerances being established in this rulemaking Cotton, undelinted seed
at 0.70 ppm; Grape at 2.0 ppm; Potato at 0.01 ppm; and Vegetable, leafy
except Brassica, group 4 at 30.0 ppm. EPA is also removing the time-
limited tolerance for onion, dry bulb at 0.09 ppm in Sec. 180.675(b)
as it is no longer needed with the establishment of a new permanent
tolerance for onion, bulb subgroup 3-07A in paragraph (a)(1).
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), 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 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: December 10, 2018.
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. 180.675:
0
a. Revise the introductory text of paragraph (a)(1);
0
b. In the table to paragraph (a)(1):
0
i. Add alphabetically the entries ``Avocado''; ``Berry, low growing,
subgroup 13-07G, except cranberry and lowbush blueberry''; ``Bushberry,
subgroup 13-07B''; ``Caneberry, subgroup 13-07A''; ``Celtuce'';
``Cottonseed, subgroup 20C''; ``Fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and
stalk''; ``Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit,
subgroup 13-07F''; ``Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B''; ``Leafy
greens, subgroup 4-16A''; ``Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A''; ``Onion,
green, subgroup 3-07B''; and ``Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup
1C'';
0
ii. Revise the entry for ``Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10'';
0
iii. Remove the entries ``Cotton, undelinted seed''; ``Grape'';
``Potato'';
[[Page 65551]]
and ``Vegetable, leafy except Brassica, group 4'';
0
c. Revise the introductory text of paragraph (a)(2);
0
d. Revise paragraph (b).
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 180.675 Tolfenpyrad; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of the
insecticide tolfenpyrad, including its metabolites and degradates, in
or on the commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance
levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only
tolfenpyrad (4-chloro-3-ethyl-1-methyl-N-[[4-(4-
methylphenoxy)phenyl]methyl]-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide) in or on the
commodity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Avocado................................................. 1.5
Berry, low growing, subgroup 13-07G, except cranberry 3.0
and lowbush blueberry..................................
* * * * * * *
Bushberry, subgroup 13-07B.............................. 7.0
Caneberry, subgroup 13-07A.............................. 7.0
Celtuce................................................. 30
* * * * * * *
Cottonseed, subgroup 20C................................ 0.70
Fennel, Florence, fresh leaves and stalk................ 30
* * * * * * *
Fruit, small, vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, 2.0
subgroup 13-07F........................................
* * * * * * *
Leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B..................... 30
Leafy greens, subgroup 4-16A............................ 30
* * * * * * *
Onion, bulb, subgroup 3-07A............................. 0.09
Onion, green, subgroup 3-07B............................ 10
* * * * * * *
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10......................... 1.5
Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C............... 0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Tolerances are established for residues of the insecticide
tolfenpyrad, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities in the following table. Compliance with the tolerance
levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only the sum of
tolfenpyrad, 4-chloro-3-ethyl-1-methyl-N-[[4-(4-
methylphenoxy)phenyl]methyl]-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide, and its
metabolite 4-[4-[(4-chloro-3-ethyl-1-methylpyrazol-5-yl)carbonylamino-
methyl]phenoxy]-benzoic acid, calculated as the stoichiometric
equivalent of tolfenpyrad.
* * * * *
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-27605 Filed 12-20-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P