Trifluralin; Pesticide Tolerances, 4345-4351 [2019-02535]
Download as PDF
4345
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
should be banned on agricultural crops,
the existing legal framework provided
by section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) authorizes
EPA to establish tolerances when it
determines that the tolerance is safe.
Upon consideration of the validity,
completeness, and reliability of the
available data as well as other factors
the FFDCA requires EPA to consider,
EPA has determined that these
trifloxystrobin tolerances are safe. The
commenter has provided no information
supporting a contrary conclusion.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
The Agency is establishing the
tolerance value on flax seed as
requested but with the addition of a
significant figure based on current
practice and establishing a tolerance on
grain, aspirated fractions using the
commodity definition that is consistent
with common commodity vocabulary
currently used by the Agency. Also,
based upon the relevant field trial and
processing studies, EPA is modifying
the tolerance in/on aspirated grain
fractions to 10 ppm, not 15 ppm as
proposed by the registrant. This is due
to differences in how the Agency and
the registrant each calculated the
processed commodity residues for
aspirated grain fractions.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established
for residues of trifloxystrobin, including
its metabolites and degradates, in or on
flax, seed at 0.40 ppm, and the existing
tolerance for grain, aspirated fractions is
amended from 5.0 ppm to 10 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes a tolerance
and amends a tolerance 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Feb 14, 2019
Jkt 247001
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 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).
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 19, 2019.
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 § 180.555, add alphabetically the
entry ‘‘Flax, seed’’ and revise the entry
for ‘‘Grain, aspirated fractions’’ in the
table in paragraph (a) to read as follows:
■
§ 180.555 Trifloxystrobin; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
Flax, seed .............................
*
*
0.40
*
*
*
Grain, aspirated grain fractions ...................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
10
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2019–02523 Filed 2–14–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0420; FRL–9983–89]
Trifluralin; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of trifluralin in
or on rosemary fresh leaves, rosemary
dried leaves, and rosemary oil.
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4) requested these tolerances under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
February 15, 2019. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before April 16, 2019, and must
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\15FER1.SGM
15FER1
4346
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0420, 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.
ADDRESSES:
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).
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Feb 14, 2019
Jkt 247001
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–2017–0420 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 April 16, 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–
2017–0420, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of October 23,
2017 (82 FR 49020) (FRL–9967–37),
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 7E8580) by IR–4,
Rutgers, The State University of New
Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201
W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
requested that 40 CFR part 180 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the herbicide trifluralin
a,a,a-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropylp-toluidine in or on rosemary, fresh
leaves at 0.1 parts per million (ppm);
rosemary, dry leaves at 0.1 ppm; and
rosemary, oil at 2.18 ppm. That
document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Gowan Company,
the registrant, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the level at which the
tolerance is being established for
rosemary oil, and modified the
significant figures and commodity
definitions used to be in line with
Agency policy. The reason for these
changes 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 trifluralin
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with trifluralin follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
E:\FR\FM\15FER1.SGM
15FER1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
The primary target organs are the
kidney and the liver in rats and dogs for
trifluralin. Liver effects include
increased liver weights and changes in
clinical chemistry parameters. In the
kidneys, tubular hyaline casts, minimal
cortical tubular epithelial regeneration
were observed microscopically, and an
increased incidence of progressive
glomerulonephritis was seen.
In the rat developmental toxicity
study, developmental effects (increased
resorptions and wavy ribs) occurred in
the presence of less severe maternal
effects (decreases in body weight gain,
clinical signs, and changes in organ
weights). In the 2-generation
reproduction study, offspring effects
(decreased fetal, neonatal and litter
viability) were observed at a dose level
where there was less severe maternal
toxicity (decreased body weight, body
weight gain and food consumption).
However, the concern was low since
clear NOAELs/LOAELs were established
for maternal and developmental
toxicities and the doses selected for
overall risk assessment would address
the concerns seen in these studies. A
21-day dermal toxicity study in the rat
showed no systemic toxicity at the limit
dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day; dermal effects
included sub-epidermal inflammation
and ulcerations at 200 mg/kg/day. A
rabbit 21-day dermal toxicity study also
did not show any systemic toxicity at
1,000 mg/kg/day; dermal effects
observed at the LOAEL (100 mg/kg/day)
included erythema, edema, and/or
scaling and fissuring. A 30-day
inhalation exposure to rats with
trifluralin at 1,000 mg/m 3 resulted in
increased methemoglobin and bilirubin,
as well as dyspnea and ruffled fur.
Trifluralin is not a neurotoxicant and
does not appear to be an
immunotoxicant.
In male rats, trifluralin was associated
with increased incidence of thyroid
follicular cell combined adenoma,
papillary adenoma, cystadenoma, and
carcinoma tumors. It has been classified
as ‘‘Group C, possible Human
Carcinogen.’’ Extensive testing showed,
however, that trifluralin is neither
mutagenic nor genotoxic, and does not
inhibit the polymerization of
microtubules in mammalian cells.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by trifluralin as well as
the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Feb 14, 2019
Jkt 247001
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in the document
titled ‘‘Trifluralin: Human Health Draft
Risk Assessment for Registration Review
and a Proposed Section 3 Use of
Trifluralin on Rosemary’’ on pages 52–
59 in docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2017–0420.
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-andassessing-pesticide-risks/assessinghuman-health-risk-pesticides.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for trifluralin used for human
risk assessment is discussed in Unit II.B.
of the final rule published in the
Federal Register of July 31, 2013 (78 FR
46267) (FRL–9393–5).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to trifluralin, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing
trifluralin tolerances in 40 CFR 180.207.
EPA assessed dietary exposures from
trifluralin 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
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4347
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1-day or single
exposure.
Such effects were identified for
trifluralin. In estimating acute dietary
exposure, EPA used 2003–2008 food
consumption data from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s)
National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA conducted
an unrefined assessment using tolerance
level residues, 100 percent crop treated
(PCT), and default Dietary Exposure
Evaluation Model (DEEM) processing
factors.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used 2003–2008 food consumption
data from the USDA’s NHANES/
WWEIA. As to residue levels in food,
the chronic dietary exposure and risk
estimates are somewhat refined and
assumed tolerance-level residues for the
majority of commodities, PCT data for
some existing uses, and DEEM default
processing factors. Pesticide Data
Program (PDP) monitoring data were
used for carrots, potatoes, bell peppers,
non-bell peppers, tomatoes, tomato
paste, oranges, orange juice, grapes,
grape juice, raisins, corn syrup, and
wheat flour.
iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether
quantitative cancer exposure and risk
assessments are appropriate for a fooduse pesticide based on the weight of the
evidence from cancer studies and other
relevant data. If quantitative cancer risk
assessment is appropriate, cancer risk
may be quantified using a linear or
nonlinear approach. If sufficient
information on the carcinogenic mode
of action is available, a threshold or
nonlinear approach is used and a cancer
RfD is calculated based on an earlier
noncancer key event. If carcinogenic
mode of action data is not available, or
if the mode of action data determines a
mutagenic mode of action, a default
linear cancer slope factor approach is
utilized. Based on the data summarized
in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that
trifluralin should be classified as a
possible human carcinogen and a linear
approach has been used to quantify
cancer risk since no mode of action data
are available.
The aggregate cancer risk assessment
for adults takes into account exposure
estimates from dietary consumption of
trifluralin from food, residential and
drinking water sources. Exposures from
residential uses are based on the
lifetime average daily dose and assume
an exposure period of 5 days per year
and 50 years of exposure in a lifetime.
Dietary exposure assumptions were
E:\FR\FM\15FER1.SGM
15FER1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
4348
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
quantified using the same estimates as
discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii., Chronic
exposure.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) 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.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states
that the Agency may use data on the
actual percent of food treated for
assessing chronic dietary risk only if:
• Condition a: The data used are
reliable and provide a valid basis to
show what percentage of the food
derived from such crop is likely to
contain the pesticide residue.
• Condition b: The exposure estimate
does not underestimate exposure for any
significant subpopulation group.
• Condition c: Data are available on
pesticide use and food consumption in
a particular area, the exposure estimate
does not understate exposure for the
population in such area. In addition, the
Agency must provide for periodic
evaluation of any estimates used. To
provide for the periodic evaluation of
the estimate of PCT as required by
FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may
require registrants to submit data on
PCT.
The Agency estimated the PCT for
existing uses as follows:
The chronic and cancer dietary
exposure and risk assessments
incorporated the following trifluralin
average percent crop treated estimates:
Almonds 2.5%; apricots 2.5%;
asparagus 20%; barley 1%; beans, green
25%; broccoli 5%; Brussels sprouts
2.5%; cabbage 40%; canola 2.5%;
cantaloupes 25%; carrots 30%;
cauliflower 5%; celery 2.5%; chicory
20%; corn 1%; cotton 30%; cucumbers
2.5%; dry beans/peas 10%; grapefruit
2.5%; grapes 2.5%; honeydews 30%;
lemons 2.5%; nectarines 2.5%; oranges
2.5%; peaches 1%; peanuts 5%; peas,
green 10%; pecans 1%; peppers 20%;
plums/prunes 1%; potatoes 2.5%;
pumpkins 5%; sorghum 2.5%; soybeans
2.5%; squash 2.5%; sugar beets 2.5%;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Feb 14, 2019
Jkt 247001
sugarcane 5%; sunflowers 5%; tomatoes
55%; walnuts 1%; watermelons 15%;
and wheat 1%. For the remaining
commodities, EPA assumed 100% crop
treated.
In most cases, EPA uses available data
from United States Department of
Agriculture/National Agricultural
Statistics Service (USDA/NASS),
proprietary market surveys, and the
National Pesticide Use Database for the
chemical/crop combination for the most
recent 6–7 years. EPA uses an average
PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis.
The average PCT figure for each existing
use is derived by combining available
public and private market survey data
for that use, averaging across all
observations, and rounding to the
nearest 5%, except for those situations
in which the average PCT is less than
one. In those cases, 1% is used as the
average PCT and 2.5% is used as the
maximum PCT. EPA uses a maximum
PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the highest
observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available
public and private market survey data
for the existing use and rounded up to
the nearest multiple of 5%.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models as well as
monitoring data in the dietary exposure
analysis and risk assessment for
trifluralin in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of trifluralin.
The estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) were calculated
using a Total Toxic Residues (TTR)
exposure modeling method, where
trifluralin and its major degradates of
concern (TR–4, TR–6, TR–7, TR–14, and
TR–15) were combined. Further
information regarding EPA drinking
water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at
https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-scienceand-assessing-pesticide-risks/aboutwater-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
Based on the Pesticide in Water
Calculator (PWC), the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)
of trifluralin for acute exposures are
estimated to be 57 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and 1.0 ppb for
ground water; for chronic exposures for
non-cancer assessments are estimated to
be 15 ppb for surface water and 1.0 ppb
for ground water; and for chronic
exposures for cancer assessments are
estimated to be 4.4 ppb for surface water
and 1.0 ppb for ground water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For the
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
acute dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value of 57 ppb was used
to assess the contribution to drinking
water. For the chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of
value 15 ppb was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water. For the
cancer dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration of value 4.4 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).
Trifluralin is currently registered for
the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: lawns, golf
courses, vegetable and ornamental
gardens. EPA assessed residential
exposure using the following
assumptions: For residential handlers,
all registered trifluralin product labels
with residential use sites (e.g., lawns,
ornamental and vegetable gardens)
require that handlers wear specific
clothing (e.g., long sleeve shirt/long
pants) and/or use personal protective
equipment (PPE) except for one label.
Therefore, EPA has assumed that only
that one product is intended for
homeowner use and has conducted a
quantitative residential handler
assessment based on the use sites and
application rates as provided on the
label. The quantitative exposure/risk
assessment developed for residential
handlers is based on the following
scenarios: Applying granules via pushtype spreader, spoon, cup, hand
dispersal, and shaker can to residential
vegetable and ornamental gardens.
Although a non-cancer dermal risk
assessment was not performed due to
the lack of an adverse effect in the noncancer dermal study, dermal exposure
was estimated for the residential
handler cancer risk assessment because
dermal exposure does contribute to the
overall cancer risk for trifluralin.
There is the potential for postapplication exposure for individuals
exposed as a result of being in an
environment that has been previously
treated with trifluralin. For the
residential post-application scenarios,
all registered trifluralin product labels
with residential use sites (e.g., turf/
lawns and ornamental and vegetable
gardens) were considered for
quantitative assessment. Although there
is the potential for dermal exposure to
adults and children, a quantitative noncancer dermal risk assessment was not
conducted since no non-cancer dermal
hazard was identified. The quantitative
E:\FR\FM\15FER1.SGM
15FER1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
non-cancer exposure/risk assessment for
residential post-application exposures is
based on the following scenario:
Incidental oral (hand to mouth, object to
mouth, and soil ingestion) exposure for
children (1 to <2) from granular
formulations applied to turf.
Episodic granular ingestion for
children is a potential exposure
pathway for granular formulations;
however, this exposure scenario could
not be assessed because an acute dietary
endpoint for general population,
including infants and children, was not
selected due to no effect attributable to
a single (or few) day(s) oral exposure
observed in animal studies.
Although a non-cancer dermal risk
assessment was not performed due to
the lack of an adverse effect in the noncancer dermal study, dermal exposure
was estimated for the residential postapplication cancer risk assessment
because dermal exposure does
contribute to the overall cancer risk for
trifluralin. Inhalation exposure is
expected to negligible.
The worst-case residential exposure
scenario used in the adult non-cancer
aggregate assessment reflects inhalation
exposure from applications to gardens
via hand dispersal.
The worst-case residential exposure
used in the adult cancer aggregate
assessment reflects dermal exposure
from post-application exposure from
liquid applications to treated gardens.
The worst-case residential exposure
used in the children 1<2 years old
aggregate assessment reflects hand-tomouth exposures from post-application
exposure to turf applications.
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticidescience-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/
standard-operating-proceduresresidential-pesticide.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
Based on a review of the toxicological
database for trifluralin and the other
dinitroanilines (benfluralin, butralin,
ethalfluralin, fluazinam, flumetralin,
oryzalin, pendimethalin, and
prodiamine), the Agency has
determined that although trifluralin
shares some chemical and/or
toxicological characteristics (e.g.,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Feb 14, 2019
Jkt 247001
chemical structure or apical endpoint)
with these other dinitroanilines, the
toxicological database does not support
a testable hypothesis for a common
mechanism of action. No further data
are required to determine that no
common mechanism of toxicity exists
for trifluralin and the other
dinitroanilines and no further
cumulative evaluation is necessary for
trifluralin. For additional details, refer
to the document titled ‘‘Dinitroanilines:
Screening Analysis of Toxicological
Profiles to Consider Whether a
Candidate Common Mechanism Group
Can Be Established’’ in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0420 in
www.regulations.gov.
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
Food Quality Protection Act (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 evidence of increased
qualitative susceptibility in the rat
developmental toxicity study, where
fetal developmental effects (increased
resorptions and wavy ribs) occurred in
the presence of less severe maternal
effects (decreases in body weight gain,
clinical signs, and changes in organ
weights); however, the concern was low
since clear NOAELs/LOAELs were
established for maternal and
developmental toxicities. There was
also a low concern for the qualitative
susceptibility observed in the rat
reproduction study since the doseresponse was also well characterized;
there was a clear NOAEL/LOAEL for
maternal and developmental toxicities;
and the effects were seen at a high-dose
level (295/337 mg/kg/day). Offspring
viability was not adversely affected in
the two other 2-generation studies with
trifluralin at dose levels up to 100 and
148 mg/kg/day. Similarly, there are no
residual uncertainties for pre- and
postnatal toxicity since the doses
selected for overall risk assessment will
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4349
address the concerns seen in these
studies.
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 trifluralin
is complete.
ii. There is no indication that
trifluralin is a neurotoxic chemical and
there is no need for a developmental
neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to
account for neurotoxicity.
iii. As noted in section D.2., there was
evidence of increased qualitative
susceptibility in the rat developmental
toxicity study, however, the concern
was low for the reasons outlined in that
section; furthermore, there was also a
low concern for the qualitative
susceptibility observed in the rat
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on a refined risk
assessment that incorporated some PCT
and anticipated residue information.
EPA made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground and surface
water modeling used to assess exposure
to trifluralin in drinking water. EPA
used similarly conservative assumptions
to assess post-application exposure of
children as well as incidental oral
exposure of toddlers. These assessments
will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by trifluralin.
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
trifluralin will occupy less than 1% of
the aPAD for females 13–49 years old,
the only population group of concern.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to trifluralin from
food and water will utilize 3.7% of the
E:\FR\FM\15FER1.SGM
15FER1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
4350
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
cPAD for all infants less than 1 year old,
the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the
explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic
residential exposure to residues of
trifluralin is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
Trifluralin is currently registered for
uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency
has determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with short-term residential
exposures to trifluralin.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined short-term food, water, and
residential exposures result in aggregate
MOEs of 24,000 for adults and 15,000
for children 1 to less than 2 years old.
Because EPA’s level of concern for
trifluralin is a MOE of 100 or below,
these MOEs are not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect
was identified; however, trifluralin is
not registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on intermediateterm residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure
and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for
trifluralin.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. A cancer aggregate
assessment was conducted for trifluralin
since it is classified as a ‘‘Group C,
Possible Human Carcinogen’’ with a
Q 1 * of 2.96 × 10–3 (mg/kg/day) ¥1
based upon male rat thyroid follicular
cell combined adenoma, papillary
adenoma, cystadenoma, and carcinoma
tumor rate in human equivalents. The
cancer aggregate risk assessment
combines food and drinking water
exposures with dermal and inhalation
exposure from post-application
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Feb 14, 2019
Jkt 247001
exposure from treated gardens. The
resulting aggregate cancer risk estimate
for adults is 1.5 × 10 ¥6.
EPA generally considers cancer risks
(expressed as the probability of an
increased cancer case) in the range of 1
in 1 million (or 1 × 10 ¥6) or less to be
negligible. The precision which can be
assumed for cancer risk estimates is best
described by rounding to the nearest
integral order of magnitude on the
logarithmic scale; for example, risks
falling between 3 × 10 ¥7 and 3 × 10 ¥6
are expressed as risks in the range of
10 ¥6. Considering the precision with
which cancer hazard can be estimated,
the conservativeness of low-dose linear
extrapolation, and the rounding
procedure described above, cancer risk
should generally not be assumed to
exceed the benchmark level of concern
of the range of 10 ¥6 until the calculated
risk exceeds approximately 3 × 10 ¥6.
This is particularly the case where some
conservatism is maintained in the
exposure assessment. EPA has
concluded the cancer risk for all
existing trifluralin uses and the uses
associated with the tolerances
established in this action fall within the
range of 1 × 10 ¥6 and are thus
negligible.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to trifluralin
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(gas chromatography (GC) with electron
capture detection (ECD)) is available 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
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 trifluralin on rosemary.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
EPA is establishing a tolerance of 3.0
ppm for residues of trifluralin in
rosemary oil rather than the proposed
value of 2.18 ppm based on Codex
rounding classes. For the other
tolerances that vary from what the
petitioner requested, EPA is establishing
tolerance values to conform to current
Agency practices on significant figures.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of trifluralin, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on
rosemary, dried leaves at 0.10 ppm;
rosemary, fresh leaves at 0.10 ppm; and
rosemary, oil at 3.0 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes tolerances
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this action is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), 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
E:\FR\FM\15FER1.SGM
15FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 32 / Friday, February 15, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers,
food processors, food handlers, and food
retailers, not States or tribes, nor does
this action alter the relationships or
distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress
in the preemption provisions of FFDCA
section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency
has determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on States
or tribal governments, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply
to this action. In addition, this action
does not impose any enforceable duty or
contain any unfunded mandate as
described under Title II of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C.
1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
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
16:03 Feb 14, 2019
Jkt 247001
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 § 180.207:
a. Revise the introductory text of
paragraph (a).
■ b. Add alphabetically the entries for
‘‘Rosemary, dried leaves’’; ‘‘Rosemary,
fresh leaves’’; and ‘‘Rosemary, oil’’ to
the table in paragraph (a).
The revision and additions read as
follows:
■
■
§ 180.207 Trifluralin; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of trifluralin,
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
trifluralin (2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-4(trifluoromethyl)benzenamine).
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
Rosemary, dried leaves ........
Rosemary, fresh leaves ........
Rosemary, oil ........................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.10
0.10
3.0
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2019–02535 Filed 2–14–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 36
[CC Docket No. 80–286, FCC No. 18–182]
Jurisdictional Separations and Referral
to the Federal-State Joint Board
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Commission amends its part 36
jurisdictional separations rules by
extending for up to six years the freeze
of separations category relationships
and allocation factors that it originally
SUMMARY:
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Dated: December 21, 2018.
Donna S. Davis,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4351
adopted in 2001. As a result, the freeze
will remain in effect until the earlier of
December 31, 2024, or the completion of
comprehensive reform of the part 36
jurisdictional separations rules. The
Commission also amends its part 36
jurisdictional separations rules by
providing rate-of-return carriers that
elected to freeze their separations
category relationships in 2001 a onetime opportunity to unfreeze and update
those relationships so that they can
categorize their costs based on current
circumstances.
These rules are effective
February 15, 2019, except for the
amendment to 47 CFR 36.3(b) which is
delayed. The Commission will publish
a document in the Federal Register
announcing the effective date.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street SW,
Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marvin Sacks, Pricing Policy Division of
the Wireline Competition Bureau, at
(202)–418–2017 or via email at
Marvin.Sacks@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
final rule summary of the Commission’s
Report and Order, released December
17, 2018. A full-text version of this
document can be obtained from the
following internet address: https://
www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-extendsjurisdictional-separations-freeze-sixyears.
DATES:
Synopsis
I. Introduction
1. In 1970, when monopoly rate-ofreturn local exchange carriers (LECs)
provided telephone services primarily
over circuit-switched, voice networks,
the Commission codified its
jurisdictional separations rules. Those
rules required each LEC to divide its
cost of providing service between the
interstate and intrastate jurisdictions in
a manner reflecting each jurisdiction’s
relative use of the LEC’s network. In an
era when the Commission and its State
counterparts set virtually all telephone
rates based on actual costs, the
separations rules helped ensure that
each LEC had the opportunity to recover
its expenses and earn a reasonable
return on its investments.
2. Today, phone companies deliver
voice, data, and video services that are
increasingly being provided over
internet Protocol-based networks. New
digital technologies blur the lines
between interstate and intrastate
communications, making last century’s
jurisdictional separations rules
inadequate and outmoded vis-a`-vis their
E:\FR\FM\15FER1.SGM
15FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 32 (Friday, February 15, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4345-4351]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-02535]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0420; FRL-9983-89]
Trifluralin; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
trifluralin in or on rosemary fresh leaves, rosemary dried leaves, and
rosemary oil. Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested
these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective February 15, 2019. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 16, 2019, and
must
[[Page 4346]]
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-2017-0420, is available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Goodis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone
number: (703) 305-7090; email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0420 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
April 16, 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-2017-0420, by one of
the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of October 23, 2017 (82 FR 49020) (FRL-
9967-37), 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
7E8580) 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 part 180 be amended by establishing tolerances
for residues of the herbicide trifluralin a,a,a-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-
N,N-dipropyl-p-toluidine in or on rosemary, fresh leaves at 0.1 parts
per million (ppm); rosemary, dry leaves at 0.1 ppm; and rosemary, oil
at 2.18 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Gowan Company, the registrant, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in
response to the notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the level at which the tolerance is being established for
rosemary oil, and modified the significant figures and commodity
definitions used to be in line with Agency policy. The reason for these
changes 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 trifluralin including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with trifluralin follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as
[[Page 4347]]
the relationship of the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has
also considered available information concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
The primary target organs are the kidney and the liver in rats and
dogs for trifluralin. Liver effects include increased liver weights and
changes in clinical chemistry parameters. In the kidneys, tubular
hyaline casts, minimal cortical tubular epithelial regeneration were
observed microscopically, and an increased incidence of progressive
glomerulonephritis was seen.
In the rat developmental toxicity study, developmental effects
(increased resorptions and wavy ribs) occurred in the presence of less
severe maternal effects (decreases in body weight gain, clinical signs,
and changes in organ weights). In the 2-generation reproduction study,
offspring effects (decreased fetal, neonatal and litter viability) were
observed at a dose level where there was less severe maternal toxicity
(decreased body weight, body weight gain and food consumption).
However, the concern was low since clear NOAELs/LOAELs were established
for maternal and developmental toxicities and the doses selected for
overall risk assessment would address the concerns seen in these
studies. A 21-day dermal toxicity study in the rat showed no systemic
toxicity at the limit dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day; dermal effects included
sub-epidermal inflammation and ulcerations at 200 mg/kg/day. A rabbit
21-day dermal toxicity study also did not show any systemic toxicity at
1,000 mg/kg/day; dermal effects observed at the LOAEL (100 mg/kg/day)
included erythema, edema, and/or scaling and fissuring. A 30-day
inhalation exposure to rats with trifluralin at 1,000 mg/m \3\ resulted
in increased methemoglobin and bilirubin, as well as dyspnea and
ruffled fur. Trifluralin is not a neurotoxicant and does not appear to
be an immunotoxicant.
In male rats, trifluralin was associated with increased incidence
of thyroid follicular cell combined adenoma, papillary adenoma,
cystadenoma, and carcinoma tumors. It has been classified as ``Group C,
possible Human Carcinogen.'' Extensive testing showed, however, that
trifluralin is neither mutagenic nor genotoxic, and does not inhibit
the polymerization of microtubules in mammalian cells.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by trifluralin 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 ``Trifluralin: Human Health
Draft Risk Assessment for Registration Review and a Proposed Section 3
Use of Trifluralin on Rosemary'' on pages 52-59 in docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0420.
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 trifluralin used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit II.B. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of July 31, 2013 (78 FR 46267) (FRL-
9393-5).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to trifluralin, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing trifluralin tolerances in 40 CFR
180.207. EPA assessed dietary exposures from trifluralin 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 trifluralin. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used 2003-2008 food consumption data from the
U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA conducted an unrefined assessment using
tolerance level residues, 100 percent crop treated (PCT), and default
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM) processing factors.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used 2003-2008 food consumption data from the USDA's
NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, the chronic dietary
exposure and risk estimates are somewhat refined and assumed tolerance-
level residues for the majority of commodities, PCT data for some
existing uses, and DEEM default processing factors. Pesticide Data
Program (PDP) monitoring data were used for carrots, potatoes, bell
peppers, non-bell peppers, tomatoes, tomato paste, oranges, orange
juice, grapes, grape juice, raisins, corn syrup, and wheat flour.
iii. Cancer. EPA determines whether quantitative cancer exposure
and risk assessments are appropriate for a food-use pesticide based on
the weight of the evidence from cancer studies and other relevant data.
If quantitative cancer risk assessment is appropriate, cancer risk may
be quantified using a linear or nonlinear approach. If sufficient
information on the carcinogenic mode of action is available, a
threshold or nonlinear approach is used and a cancer RfD is calculated
based on an earlier noncancer key event. If carcinogenic mode of action
data is not available, or if the mode of action data determines a
mutagenic mode of action, a default linear cancer slope factor approach
is utilized. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that trifluralin should be classified as a possible human
carcinogen and a linear approach has been used to quantify cancer risk
since no mode of action data are available.
The aggregate cancer risk assessment for adults takes into account
exposure estimates from dietary consumption of trifluralin from food,
residential and drinking water sources. Exposures from residential uses
are based on the lifetime average daily dose and assume an exposure
period of 5 days per year and 50 years of exposure in a lifetime.
Dietary exposure assumptions were
[[Page 4348]]
quantified using the same estimates as discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii.,
Chronic exposure.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) 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.
Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary
risk only if:
Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a
valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop
is likely to contain the pesticide residue.
Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
Condition c: Data are available on pesticide use and food
consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not
understate exposure for the population in such area. In addition, the
Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any estimates used. To
provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate of PCT as required
by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require registrants to submit
data on PCT.
The Agency estimated the PCT for existing uses as follows:
The chronic and cancer dietary exposure and risk assessments
incorporated the following trifluralin average percent crop treated
estimates: Almonds 2.5%; apricots 2.5%; asparagus 20%; barley 1%;
beans, green 25%; broccoli 5%; Brussels sprouts 2.5%; cabbage 40%;
canola 2.5%; cantaloupes 25%; carrots 30%; cauliflower 5%; celery 2.5%;
chicory 20%; corn 1%; cotton 30%; cucumbers 2.5%; dry beans/peas 10%;
grapefruit 2.5%; grapes 2.5%; honeydews 30%; lemons 2.5%; nectarines
2.5%; oranges 2.5%; peaches 1%; peanuts 5%; peas, green 10%; pecans 1%;
peppers 20%; plums/prunes 1%; potatoes 2.5%; pumpkins 5%; sorghum 2.5%;
soybeans 2.5%; squash 2.5%; sugar beets 2.5%; sugarcane 5%; sunflowers
5%; tomatoes 55%; walnuts 1%; watermelons 15%; and wheat 1%. For the
remaining commodities, EPA assumed 100% crop treated.
In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States
Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service
(USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and the National Pesticide Use
Database for the chemical/crop combination for the most recent 6-7
years. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis. The
average PCT figure for each existing use is derived by combining
available public and private market survey data for that use, averaging
across all observations, and rounding to the nearest 5%, except for
those situations in which the average PCT is less than one. In those
cases, 1% is used as the average PCT and 2.5% is used as the maximum
PCT. EPA uses a maximum PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The
maximum PCT figure is the highest observed maximum value reported
within the recent 6 years of available public and private market survey
data for the existing use and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models as well as monitoring data in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment for trifluralin in drinking
water. These simulation models take into account data on the physical,
chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of trifluralin. The
estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) were calculated using a
Total Toxic Residues (TTR) exposure modeling method, where trifluralin
and its major degradates of concern (TR-4, TR-6, TR-7, TR-14, and TR-
15) were combined. 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 in Water Calculator (PWC), the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of trifluralin for acute
exposures are estimated to be 57 parts per billion (ppb) for surface
water and 1.0 ppb for ground water; for chronic exposures for non-
cancer assessments are estimated to be 15 ppb for surface water and 1.0
ppb for ground water; and for chronic exposures for cancer assessments
are estimated to be 4.4 ppb for surface water and 1.0 ppb for ground
water.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For the acute dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 57 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water. For the chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 15 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water. For the cancer dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 4.4 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).
Trifluralin is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: lawns, golf courses, vegetable
and ornamental gardens. EPA assessed residential exposure using the
following assumptions: For residential handlers, all registered
trifluralin product labels with residential use sites (e.g., lawns,
ornamental and vegetable gardens) require that handlers wear specific
clothing (e.g., long sleeve shirt/long pants) and/or use personal
protective equipment (PPE) except for one label. Therefore, EPA has
assumed that only that one product is intended for homeowner use and
has conducted a quantitative residential handler assessment based on
the use sites and application rates as provided on the label. The
quantitative exposure/risk assessment developed for residential
handlers is based on the following scenarios: Applying granules via
push-type spreader, spoon, cup, hand dispersal, and shaker can to
residential vegetable and ornamental gardens.
Although a non-cancer dermal risk assessment was not performed due
to the lack of an adverse effect in the non-cancer dermal study, dermal
exposure was estimated for the residential handler cancer risk
assessment because dermal exposure does contribute to the overall
cancer risk for trifluralin.
There is the potential for post-application exposure for
individuals exposed as a result of being in an environment that has
been previously treated with trifluralin. For the residential post-
application scenarios, all registered trifluralin product labels with
residential use sites (e.g., turf/lawns and ornamental and vegetable
gardens) were considered for quantitative assessment. Although there is
the potential for dermal exposure to adults and children, a
quantitative non-cancer dermal risk assessment was not conducted since
no non-cancer dermal hazard was identified. The quantitative
[[Page 4349]]
non-cancer exposure/risk assessment for residential post-application
exposures is based on the following scenario: Incidental oral (hand to
mouth, object to mouth, and soil ingestion) exposure for children (1 to
<2) from granular formulations applied to turf.
Episodic granular ingestion for children is a potential exposure
pathway for granular formulations; however, this exposure scenario
could not be assessed because an acute dietary endpoint for general
population, including infants and children, was not selected due to no
effect attributable to a single (or few) day(s) oral exposure observed
in animal studies.
Although a non-cancer dermal risk assessment was not performed due
to the lack of an adverse effect in the non-cancer dermal study, dermal
exposure was estimated for the residential post-application cancer risk
assessment because dermal exposure does contribute to the overall
cancer risk for trifluralin. Inhalation exposure is expected to
negligible.
The worst-case residential exposure scenario used in the adult non-
cancer aggregate assessment reflects inhalation exposure from
applications to gardens via hand dispersal.
The worst-case residential exposure used in the adult cancer
aggregate assessment reflects dermal exposure from post-application
exposure from liquid applications to treated gardens.
The worst-case residential exposure used in the children 1<2 years
old aggregate assessment reflects hand-to-mouth exposures from post-
application exposure to turf applications.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
Based on a review of the toxicological database for trifluralin and
the other dinitroanilines (benfluralin, butralin, ethalfluralin,
fluazinam, flumetralin, oryzalin, pendimethalin, and prodiamine), the
Agency has determined that although trifluralin shares some chemical
and/or toxicological characteristics (e.g., chemical structure or
apical endpoint) with these other dinitroanilines, the toxicological
database does not support a testable hypothesis for a common mechanism
of action. No further data are required to determine that no common
mechanism of toxicity exists for trifluralin and the other
dinitroanilines and no further cumulative evaluation is necessary for
trifluralin. For additional details, refer to the document titled
``Dinitroanilines: Screening Analysis of Toxicological Profiles to
Consider Whether a Candidate Common Mechanism Group Can Be
Established'' in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0420 in
www.regulations.gov.
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 Food Quality
Protection Act (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 evidence of
increased qualitative susceptibility in the rat developmental toxicity
study, where fetal developmental effects (increased resorptions and
wavy ribs) occurred in the presence of less severe maternal effects
(decreases in body weight gain, clinical signs, and changes in organ
weights); however, the concern was low since clear NOAELs/LOAELs were
established for maternal and developmental toxicities. There was also a
low concern for the qualitative susceptibility observed in the rat
reproduction study since the dose-response was also well characterized;
there was a clear NOAEL/LOAEL for maternal and developmental
toxicities; and the effects were seen at a high-dose level (295/337 mg/
kg/day). Offspring viability was not adversely affected in the two
other 2-generation studies with trifluralin at dose levels up to 100
and 148 mg/kg/day. Similarly, there are no residual uncertainties for
pre- and postnatal toxicity since the doses selected for overall risk
assessment will address the concerns seen in these studies.
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 trifluralin is complete.
ii. There is no indication that trifluralin is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. As noted in section D.2., there was evidence of increased
qualitative susceptibility in the rat developmental toxicity study,
however, the concern was low for the reasons outlined in that section;
furthermore, there was also a low concern for the qualitative
susceptibility observed in the rat reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on a refined risk assessment that incorporated some PCT and anticipated
residue information. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to
trifluralin in drinking water. EPA used similarly conservative
assumptions to assess post-application exposure of children as well as
incidental oral exposure of toddlers. These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks posed by trifluralin.
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 trifluralin will occupy less than 1% of the aPAD for females 13-49
years old, the only population group of concern.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
trifluralin from food and water will utilize 3.7% of the
[[Page 4350]]
cPAD for all infants less than 1 year old, the population group
receiving the greatest exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit
III.C.3., regarding residential use patterns, chronic residential
exposure to residues of trifluralin is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
Trifluralin is currently registered for uses that could result in
short-term residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it
is appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water
with short-term residential exposures to trifluralin.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 24,000 for adults
and 15,000 for children 1 to less than 2 years old. Because EPA's level
of concern for trifluralin is a MOE of 100 or below, these MOEs are not
of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
trifluralin is not registered for any use patterns that would result in
intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for
trifluralin.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. A cancer aggregate
assessment was conducted for trifluralin since it is classified as a
``Group C, Possible Human Carcinogen'' with a Q \1\ * of 2.96 x 10-3
(mg/kg/day) -\1\ based upon male rat thyroid follicular cell
combined adenoma, papillary adenoma, cystadenoma, and carcinoma tumor
rate in human equivalents. The cancer aggregate risk assessment
combines food and drinking water exposures with dermal and inhalation
exposure from post-application exposure from treated gardens. The
resulting aggregate cancer risk estimate for adults is 1.5 x 10
-\6\.
EPA generally considers cancer risks (expressed as the probability
of an increased cancer case) in the range of 1 in 1 million (or 1 x 10
-\6\) or less to be negligible. The precision which can be
assumed for cancer risk estimates is best described by rounding to the
nearest integral order of magnitude on the logarithmic scale; for
example, risks falling between 3 x 10 -\7\ and 3 x 10
-\6\ are expressed as risks in the range of 10
-\6\. Considering the precision with which cancer hazard can
be estimated, the conservativeness of low-dose linear extrapolation,
and the rounding procedure described above, cancer risk should
generally not be assumed to exceed the benchmark level of concern of
the range of 10 -\6\ until the calculated risk exceeds
approximately 3 x 10 -\6\. This is particularly the case
where some conservatism is maintained in the exposure assessment. EPA
has concluded the cancer risk for all existing trifluralin uses and the
uses associated with the tolerances established in this action fall
within the range of 1 x 10 -\6\ and are thus negligible.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to trifluralin residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (gas chromatography (GC) with
electron capture detection (ECD)) is available 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 not established a MRL for trifluralin on rosemary.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
EPA is establishing a tolerance of 3.0 ppm for residues of
trifluralin in rosemary oil rather than the proposed value of 2.18 ppm
based on Codex rounding classes. For the other tolerances that vary
from what the petitioner requested, EPA is establishing tolerance
values to conform to current Agency practices on significant figures.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of trifluralin,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on rosemary, dried
leaves at 0.10 ppm; rosemary, fresh leaves at 0.10 ppm; and rosemary,
oil at 3.0 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 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
[[Page 4351]]
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 21, 2018.
Donna S. Davis,
Acting 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. 180.207:
0
a. Revise the introductory text of paragraph (a).
0
b. Add alphabetically the entries for ``Rosemary, dried leaves'';
``Rosemary, fresh leaves''; and ``Rosemary, oil'' to the table in
paragraph (a).
The revision and additions read as follows:
Sec. 180.207 Trifluralin; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of
trifluralin, 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 trifluralin (2,6-
dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-4-(trifluoromethyl)benzenamine).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Rosemary, dried leaves.................................. 0.10
Rosemary, fresh leaves.................................. 0.10
Rosemary, oil........................................... 3.0
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-02535 Filed 2-14-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P