Fenazaquin; Pesticide Tolerances, 14617-14622 [2019-07173]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
14617
EPA-APPROVED FLORIDA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS
State
effective
date
Provision
*
*
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 8-Hour
Ozone NAAQS.
*
10/3/2017
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0673; FRL–9990–02]
Fenazaquin; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of fenazaquin in
or on multiple commodities which are
identified and discussed later in this
document. Gowan Company, LLC,
requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective April
11, 2019. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
June 10, 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–2017–0673, 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
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
16:02 Apr 10, 2019
Jkt 247001
Explanation
*
*
[Insert Federal Register citation] ..
*
*
Addressing prongs 1 and 2 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) only.
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.
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–
2017–0673, 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.
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–2017–0673 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 June 10, 2019. Addresses for mail
and hand delivery of objections and
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of March 6,
2018 (83 FR 9471) (FRL–9973–27), 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 7F8618) by Gowan
Company, LLC, P.O. Box 556, Yuma, AZ
85364. The petition requested that 40
CFR 180.632 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of
the miticide/insecticide fenazaquin, 4[2-[4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)phenyl]ethoxy]
quinazoline, in or on alfalfa, forage at
4.0 parts per million (ppm); alfalfa, hay
at 15 ppm; avocado at 0.15 ppm;
bushberry, subgroup 13–07B at 0.8 ppm;
caneberry, subgroup 13–07A at 0.7 ppm;
I. General Information
40 CFR Part 180
VerDate Sep<11>2014
4/11/2019
Federal Register, notice
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460–0001; main telephone number:
(703) 305–7090; email address:
RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2019–07114 Filed 4–10–19; 8:45 am]
SUMMARY:
EPA
approval
date
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).
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM
11APR1
14618
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
fruit, citrus, group 10–10 at 0.4 ppm;
fruit, low growing berry, subgroup 13–
07G at 2.0 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.09
ppm; corn, field, forage at 7.0 ppm;
corn, field, stover at 40 ppm; corn, field,
aspirated grain fractions at 3.0 ppm;
corn, field, refined oil at 0.2 ppm; corn,
sweet, forage at 9.0 ppm; corn, sweet,
grain at 0.03 ppm; cotton, gin
byproducts at 15.0 ppm; cotton,
undelinted seed at 0.4 ppm; fruit, pome,
group 11–10 at 0.4 ppm; fruit, small
fruit vine climbing, except fuzzy
kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F at 0.7 ppm;
fruit, stone, group 12–12 at 1.5 ppm;
grape, raisins at 0.8 ppm; mint at 10.0
ppm; vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 at 0.3
ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10 at
0.3 ppm; vegetable, legume, edible
podded, subgroup 6A at 0.4 ppm;
vegetables, legumes, dried shelled pea
and bean (except soybean) subgroup 6C
at 0.3 ppm; vegetables, legumes,
succulent shelled pea and bean
subgroup 6B at 0.02 ppm; beef, fat at
0.05 ppm; pork, fat at 0.05 ppm; sheep,
fat at 0.05 ppm; milk at 0.01 ppm; liver
at 0.02 p.m.; and kidney at 0.01 ppm.
That document referenced a summary of
the petition prepared by Gowan
Company, LLC, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. EPA received one
favorable comment in response to the
Notice of Filing from the Northwest
Horticultural Council in support of
establishing tolerances for fruit, pome,
group 11–10 and fruit, stone, group 12–
12.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the commodity definitions and
the tolerance levels for many of the
proposed uses. Additionally, EPA is
increasing the current tolerance level for
citrus, oil and is not establishing
tolerances on alfalfa, cotton, corn, and
livestock commodities. The reasons for
the changes and modifications are
further 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:02 Apr 10, 2019
Jkt 247001
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 fenazaquin
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with fenazaquin follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered its validity,
completeness, and reliability as well as
the relationship of the results of the
studies to human risk. EPA has also
considered available information
concerning the variability of the
sensitivities of major identifiable
subgroups of consumers, including
infants and children.
The most consistently observed
effects of fenazaquin exposure across
species, sexes, and treatment durations
were decreases in body weight, food
consumption, and food efficiency. The
effects on body weight and food
consumption were consistent with the
commonly observed effects for
compounds that disrupt mitochondrial
respiration. Other effects noted were
mild dehydration and certain clinical
signs seen at relatively high dose levels
in the acute activity, sluggish arousal,
unusual posture, abnormal gait, and
altered response to auditory stimuli
were seen in the absence of any
neuropathological changes and were not
considered to be related to
neurotoxicity. In a 90-day study in
hamsters, treated animals had an
increased incidence of testicular
hypospermatogenesis and reduced
testicular and prostate weight; however,
these findings were not replicated in the
hamster carcinogenicity study which
suggest the effects were transient or
reversible.
Fenazaquin did not cause any
developmental or reproductive toxicity
at the doses tested in rats and rabbits.
In the rat study, developmental toxicity
was not observed in the presence of
maternal toxicity (i.e. decreases in body
weight gain, food consumption, and
food efficiency). In the rabbit study, no
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
developmental or maternal toxicity was
seen. In the reproduction study,
systemic toxicity manifested in parental
animals as excessive salivation and
decreased body weight and food intake;
and in offspring as decreased body
weight gain; and there was no observed
reproductive toxicity. Therefore, there is
no developmental toxicity or
reproductive susceptibility with respect
to fetal and developing young animals
with in utero and postnatal exposures.
Carcinogenicity was evaluated in the
hamster instead of the mouse because
the hamster was found to be more
sensitive to the effects of fenazaquin
than mice due to slower elimination
kinetics for hamster. In a three-month
feeding study in the mouse, it was
found that 6–22x higher dose levels
were required to elicit a comparable
effect in mice than in the hamster. The
results of the rat and hamster
carcinogenicity studies demonstrated no
increase in treatment-related tumor
incidence. Therefore, fenazaquin was
classified as ‘‘not likely to be
carcinogenic to humans.’’
Fenazaquin did not cause
mutagenicity, genotoxicity,
neurotoxicity, or immunotoxicity.
Fenazaquin did not demonstrate any
systemic toxicity in a 21-day dermal
toxicity study in rabbits up to the limit
dose (1,000 milligram/kilogram/day
(mg/kg/day)).
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by fenazaquin 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
‘‘Fenazaquin: Human Health Risk
Assessment in Support of Proposed
Uses on Avocado, Bushberry Subgroup
13–07B, Caneberry Subgroup 13–07A,
Citrus Fruit Group 10–10, Cucurbit
Vegetables Group 9, Fruiting Vegetables
Group 8–10, Edible-Podded Legume
Vegetable Subgroup 6A, Succulent Pea
And Bean Subgroup 6B, Dried Shelled
Pea And Bean (Except Soybean)
Subgroup 6C, Low Growing Berry
Subgroup 13–07G, Mint, Pome Fruit
Group 11–10, Small Fruit Vine Climbing
Subgroup, Except Fuzzy Kiwifruit 13–
07F, and Stone Fruit Group 12–12’’ in
pages 11–17 in docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPP–2017–0673.
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
E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM
11APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
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 fenazaquin used for
human risk assessment is discussed in
Unit III.B. of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of May 6, 2015 (80
FR 25953) (FRL–9925–97).
C. Exposure Assessment
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to fenazaquin, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing
fenazaquin tolerances in 40 CFR
180.632. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from fenazaquin 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 fenazaquin. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used the Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Model software
with the Food Commodity Intake
Database (DEEM–FCID) Version 3.16.
This software uses 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 assumed
tolerance-level residues, DEEM default
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:02 Apr 10, 2019
Jkt 247001
processing factors for tomato (paste and
juice), dried apple, dried pear, dried
apricot, cherry juice, plum/prune juice,
and dried coconut, and 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) for all proposed and
registered uses.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the DEEM–FCID Version 3.16.
This software uses USDA’s NHANES/
WWEIA. As to residue levels in food,
EPA assumed tolerance-level residues,
DEEM default processing factors for
tomato (paste and juice), dried apple,
dried pear, dried apricot, cherry juice,
plum/prune juice, and dried coconut,
and 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for
all proposed and registered uses.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that fenazaquin 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. EPA did
not use anticipated residue and/or PCT
information in the dietary assessment
for fenazaquin. Tolerance-level residues
and/or 100% CT were assumed for all
food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. In drinking water, the residues of
concern are fenazaquin (parent) and two
metabolites: Metabolite M29 or 2-(4-{2[(2-hydroxyquinazolin-4yl)oxy]ethyl}phenyl)-2methylpropanoic acid and its tautomer
2-methyl-2-(4-{2-[(2-oxo-1,2dihydroquinazolin-4yl)oxy]ethyl}phenyl)propanoic acid;
and Metabolite 1 or 4-[2-(4-tert-butylphenyl)-ethoxy]-quinazolin-2-ol and its
tautomer 4-[2-(4-tertbutylphenyl)ethoxy]quinazolin-2(1H)one..
Although a screening level drinking
water assessment (DWA) was
conducted, EPA used the solubility
limit of fenazaquin at 20 °C, 102 parts
per billion (ppb), in place of EDWCs
from the modeling that are well below
the solubility limit of fenazaquin, for the
proposed new uses and rate increases in
the human health risk assessment. This
concentration is not representative of
anticipated exposures in drinking water,
but is used as an upper bound limit to
represent the potential exposure to
fenazaquin and the two additional
residues of concern.
The solubility limit of fenazaquin at
20 °C, 102 ppb, was directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
acute dietary risk assessment, the water
concentration value of 102 ppb was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
14619
assessment, the water concentration of
value 102 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).
Fenazaquin is currently registered for
the following uses that could result in
residential exposures: Ornamental
plants. There is a potential for exposure
associated with handling (i.e., mixing,
loading and applying), as well as postapplication exposure from the use of
fenazaquin on ornamental plants.
However, for residential exposure
associated with handlers, all registered
fenazaquin product labels with
residential use sites (e.g., ornamental
plants) require that handlers wear
specific clothing (e.g., long-sleeve shirt/
long pants/chemical resistant gloves)
and/or use personal protective
equipment (PPE). Therefore, the Agency
has made the assumption that these
products are not for homeowner use,
and has not conducted a quantitative
residential handler assessment. With
respect to the potential residential postapplication exposure from the use of
fenazaquin on ornamental plants, since
there is (1) no adverse systemic hazard
via the dermal route of exposure; (2)
inhalation exposures are typically
negligible in outdoor settings; and (3)
there is no incidental oral exposure
expected from fenazaquin use on
ornamental plants, a residential postapplication assessment is unnecessary.
Furthermore, since the extent to which
young children engage in activities
associated with these areas or utilize
these areas for prolonged periods of play
is low, significant non-dietary ingestion
exposure is not expected. Further
information regarding EPA standard
assumptions and generic inputs for
residential exposures may be found at
https://www2.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
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’ EPA has not
found fenazaquin to share a common
mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and fenazaquin does not
E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM
11APR1
14620
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has assumed that
fenazaquin does not have a common
mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding
EPA’s efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism
of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals,
see EPA’s website at https://
www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-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
Food Quality Protection Act Safety
Factor (FQPA 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.
Susceptibility/sensitivity in the
developing animals was evaluated in
developmental toxicity studies in rats
and rabbits as well as a reproduction
and fertility study in rats. The data
showed no evidence of increased
sensitivity/susceptibility in the
developing or young animal. Clear
NOAELs and LOAELs are available for
all the parental and 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
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for fenazaquin
is complete.
ii. There is no indication that
fenazaquin is a neurotoxic chemical and
there is no need for a developmental
neurotoxicity study or additional
Uncertainty Factors (UFs) to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no concern for
susceptibility in infants and young
children.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were based on 100% CT and tolerance
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:02 Apr 10, 2019
Jkt 247001
level residues for both the acute and
chronic dietary exposure. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions
when using the solubility limit of
fenazaquin to account for exposure to
fenazaquin in drinking water. These
assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by fenazaquin.
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
fenazaquin will occupy 31% of the
aPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to fenazaquin
from food and water will utilize 37% of
the cPAD for children 1–2 years old, the
population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses
for fenazaquin which contribute to the
aggregate exposure.
3. Short-term and intermediate-term
risk. Short-term and intermediate-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term and intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Because there is no toxicological hazard
via the dermal route of exposure for
fenazaquin, short-term and
intermediate-term aggregate exposure
consists solely of chronic exposure to
food and water, which is below the
Agency’s level of concern.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two
adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies,
fenazaquin 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
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
from aggregate exposure to fenazaquin
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate analytical methods are
available for enforcing fenazaquin
tolerances on plant commodities. The
high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC) method with
tandem mass spectrometry detection
(HPLC/MS–MS) method is the same as
that used for data collection and has
been shown to be acceptable over a
range of commodities. The method has
undergone successful independent
laboratory confirmation and radio
validation. The ion transitions
monitored for fenazaquin are m/z 307.0
→ 161.2 for (quantitation) and m/z
307.0 → 147.2 (confirmation). The LOQ
of the method was determined to be
0.01 ppm for fenazaquin. 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 MRLs
for fenazaquin.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing tolerances for the following
commodities requested using the
Agency’s preferred commodity
terminology: Instead of establishing a
tolerance for grape, raisins as requested,
the Agency is establishing a tolerance
for grape, raisin; revising fruit, low
E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM
11APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
growing berry, subgroup 13–07G to
berry, low growing, subgroup 13–07G;
revising the requested mint to
peppermint, fresh leaves and spearmint,
fresh leaves; revising the requested
vegetables, legumes, succulent shelled
pea and bean subgroup 6B to pea and
bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B;
revising vegetables, legumes, dried
shelled pea and bean (except soybean)
subgroup 6C to pea and bean, dried
shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C.
In addition, based on supporting data,
the Agency is establishing tolerance
levels higher than requested for fruit,
stone, group 12–12 at 2 ppm and for
fruit, pome, group 11–10 at 0.6 ppm. In
addition, because the current residue
data supporting fruit, citrus, group 10–
10 indicates that residues concentrate in
citrus, oil, EPA is establishing a
tolerance for fruit, citrus, group 10–10,
oil consistent with the requirements in
40 CFR 180.40(f)(1). This tolerance
supersedes the existing tolerance for
citrus, oil, so EPA is removing that
tolerance. The Agency is also
establishing tolerances and revising
current tolerance levels consistent the
Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD) maximum
residue limits calculator. Finally, due to
a lack of supporting data, EPA is not
establishing any tolerances for alfalfa,
forage; alfalfa, hay; corn, field, forage;
corn, field, aspirated grain fractions;
corn, field, grain; corn, field, refined oil;
corn, field, stover; corn, sweet, forage;
corn, sweet, grain; cotton, gin
byproducts; cotton, undelinted seed;
beef, fat; pork, fat; sheep, fat; liver;
kidney; and milk.
D. International Trade Considerations
In this rule, EPA is revising the
commodity definition of and reducing
the existing tolerance for citrus
commodities as follows: Fruit, citrus,
group 10 except grapefruit will become
fruit, citrus, group 10–10 and the
tolerance will be revised from 0.5 ppm
to 0.4 ppm. The Agency is reducing this
tolerance based on review of available
data. This reduction in tolerance level is
not discriminatory; the same food safety
standard contained in the FFDCA
applies equally to domestically
produced and imported foods.
In accordance with the World Trade
Organization’s (WTO) Sanitary and
Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)
Agreement, EPA will notify the WTO of
its tolerance revision. In addition, the
SPS Agreement requires that Members
provide a ‘‘reasonable interval’’ between
the publication of a regulation subject to
the Agreement and its entry into force
in order to allow time for producers in
exporting Member countries to adapt to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:02 Apr 10, 2019
Jkt 247001
the new requirement. At this time, EPA
is establishing an expiration date for the
existing tolerances to allow those
tolerances remain in effect for a period
of six months after the effective date of
this final rule, in order to address this
requirement. Prior to the expiration
date, residues of fenazaquin up to the
existing tolerance level will be
permitted; after the expiration date,
residues will need to be compliant with
the reduced tolerance level.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of fenazaquin, 4-[2-[4-(1,1dimethylethyl)phenyl]
ethoxy]quinazoline, in or on avocado at
0.15 ppm; berry, low growing, subgroup
13–07G at 2 ppm; bushberry, subgroup
13–07B at 0.8 ppm; caneberry, subgroup
13–07A at 0.7 ppm; fruit, citrus, group
10–10, oil at 20 ppm; fruit, citrus, group
10–10 at 0.4 ppm; fruit, pome, group
11–10 at 0.6 ppm; fruit, small fruit vine
climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit,
subgroup 13–07F at 0.7 ppm; fruit,
stone, group 12–12 at 2 ppm; grape,
raisin at 0.8 ppm; pea and bean, dried
shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C at
0.3 ppm; pea and bean, succulent
shelled, subgroup 6B at 0.03 ppm;
peppermint, fresh leaves at 10 ppm;
spearmint, fresh leaves at 10 ppm;
vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 at 0.3 ppm;
vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10 at 0.3
ppm; and vegetable, legume, edible
podded, subgroup 6A at 0.4 ppm. In
addition, EPA is removing the following
tolerances: (1) Individual tolerances for
apple, pear, and cherry because they are
superseded by the new tolerances for
pome fruit group 11–10 and stone fruit
group 12–12; (2) the group tolerance for
fruit, citrus, group 10, except grapefruit
because it is superseded by a new group
tolerance for fruit, citrus, group 10–10;
and (3) the tolerance for citrus, oil
because it is superseded by the new
group tolerance for fruit, citrus, group
10–10, oil. The Agency is setting a 6month expiration date on the current
group tolerance for fruit, citrus, group
10, except grapefruit to provide a
reasonable interval for exporting
countries to adjust to the lower fruit,
citrus, group 10–10 tolerance.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
14621
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this action is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001); Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997); or Executive Order
13771, entitled ‘‘Reducing Regulations
and Controlling Regulatory Costs’’ (82
FR 9339, February 3, 2017). This action
does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval
under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does
it require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the 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
E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM
11APR1
14622
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
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).
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
are no U.S. registrations as of May
25, 2017 for use on pineapple and tea.
2 This tolerance expires on October 11,
2019.
*
*
RIN 0991–AC10
Privacy Act; Implementation
Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Final rule.
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.632, revise the table in
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
■
The Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS or Department) is
issuing this final rule to make effective
the exemptions that HHS proposed for
certain records covered in a new Privacy
Act system of records, System No. 09–
90–1701, HHS Insider Threat Program
Records.
This final rule is effective April
11, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael W. Schmoyer, Assistant Deputy
Secretary for National Security by email
at insiderthreat@hhs.gov or telephone at
(202) 690–5756, or by mail to the HHS
Office of Security and Strategic
Information (OSSI), 200 Independence
Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20201.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a (Privacy
Act or Act), the exemptions were
described in a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) published for
public notice and comment at 83 FR
42627 (Aug. 23, 2018). The new system
of records is described in a System of
Records Notice (SORN) which was
published for public notice and
comment the same day, at 83 FR 42667
(Aug 23, 2018). Only law enforcement
investigatory material and classified
intelligence information were proposed
to be exempted, based on subsections
(k)(1) and (k)(2) of the Act, from the
requirements contained in subsections
(c)(3), (d)(1)-(4), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H), and
(I), and (f) of the Act, which require the
agency to provide an accounting of
disclosures; provide notification, access,
and amendment rights, rules, and
procedures; maintain only relevant and
necessary information; and identify
DATES:
§ 180.632 Fenazaquin; Tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
Parts per
million
Jkt 247001
*
45 CFR Part 5b
SUMMARY:
16:02 Apr 10, 2019
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
[FR Doc. 2019–07173 Filed 4–10–19; 8:45 am]
AGENCY:
Almond, hulls ..............................
Avocado ......................................
Berry, low growing, subgroup
13–07G ...................................
Bushberry, subgroup 13–07B .....
Caneberry, subgroup 13–07A ....
Fruit, Citrus, Group 10 except
Grapefruit 2 ..............................
Fruit, citrus, group 10–10 ...........
Fruit, citrus, group 10–10, oil .....
Fruit, pome, group 11–10 ...........
Fruit, small vine climbing, except
fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13–
07F ..........................................
Fruit, stone, group 12–12 ...........
Grape, raisin ...............................
Hop, dried cones ........................
Nuts, Tree, Group 14–12 ...........
Pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C ....
Pea and bean, succulent
shelled, subgroup 6B ..............
Peppermint, fresh leaves ............
Pineapple 1 ..................................
Spearmint, fresh leaves ..............
Tea, dried 1 .................................
Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 ......
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10 ..
0.4
1 There
Dated: March 28, 2019.
Michael Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
PART 180—[AMENDED]
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
Vegetable, legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A ...................
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Commodity
Parts per
million
Commodity
4
0.15
2
0.8
0.7
0.5
0.4
20
0.6
0.7
2
0.8
30
0.02
0.3
0.03
10
0.2
10
9
0.3
0.3
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
categories of record sources. The NPRM
also explained that if the HHS Insider
Threat Program obtains law enforcement
investigatory material from another
Privacy Act system of records that has
been exempted from Privacy Act
requirements based on subsection (j)(2)
of the Act, that material will be exempt
in System No. 09–90–1701 to the same
extent it is exempt in the source system,
so it may be exempt from requirements
in any of these subsections of the Act:
(c)(3)–(4); (d)(1)–(4); (e)(1)–(3), (e)(4)(G)–
(I), (e)(5), (e)(8), (e)(12); (f); (g); and (h).
The comment period for the SORN
and NPRM was open through September
24, 2018. No comments were received
on the NPRM and no comments were
received on the SORN. No changes to
the proposed exemptions or to the
SORN were made following the public
comment period.
The specific rationales that support
the exemptions as to each affected
Privacy Act provision, remain as stated
in the NPRM; the exemptions from the
particular subsections are necessary and
appropriate, and justified for the
following reasons:
• 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) (the requirement
to provide accountings of disclosures)
and 5 U.S.C. 552a(d)(1)–(4)
(requirements addressing notification,
access, and amendment rights,
collectively referred to herein as access
requirements). Providing individual
record subjects with accountings of
disclosures and with notification,
access, and amendment rights with
respect to Insider Threat Program
records could reveal the existence of an
investigation, investigative interest,
investigative techniques, details about
an investigation, security-sensitive
information such as information about
security measures and security
vulnerabilities, information that must
remain non-public to protect national
security or personal privacy-identities of
law enforcement personnel, or other
sensitive or classified information.
Revealing such information to record
subjects would thwart or impede
pending and future law enforcement
investigations and efforts to protect
national security, and would violate
personal privacy. Revealing the
information would enable record
subjects or other persons to evade
detection and apprehension by security
and law enforcement personnel;
destroy, conceal, or tamper with
evidence or fabricate testimony; or
harass, intimidate, harm, coerce, or
retaliate against witnesses,
complainants, investigators, security
personnel, law enforcement personnel,
or their family members, their
employees, or other individuals. With
E:\FR\FM\11APR1.SGM
11APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 70 (Thursday, April 11, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14617-14622]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07173]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0673; FRL-9990-02]
Fenazaquin; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
fenazaquin in or on multiple commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. Gowan Company, LLC, requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective April 11, 2019. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before June 10, 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-2017-0673, 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: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
Crop production (NAICS code 111).
Animal production (NAICS code 112).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government
Printing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0673 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
June 10, 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-2017-0673, 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 March 6, 2018 (83 FR 9471) (FRL-9973-
27), 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
7F8618) by Gowan Company, LLC, P.O. Box 556, Yuma, AZ 85364. The
petition requested that 40 CFR 180.632 be amended by establishing
tolerances for residues of the miticide/insecticide fenazaquin, 4-[2-
[4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)phenyl]ethoxy]quinazoline, in or on alfalfa,
forage at 4.0 parts per million (ppm); alfalfa, hay at 15 ppm; avocado
at 0.15 ppm; bushberry, subgroup 13-07B at 0.8 ppm; caneberry, subgroup
13-07A at 0.7 ppm;
[[Page 14618]]
fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 0.4 ppm; fruit, low growing berry,
subgroup 13-07G at 2.0 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.09 ppm; corn,
field, forage at 7.0 ppm; corn, field, stover at 40 ppm; corn, field,
aspirated grain fractions at 3.0 ppm; corn, field, refined oil at 0.2
ppm; corn, sweet, forage at 9.0 ppm; corn, sweet, grain at 0.03 ppm;
cotton, gin byproducts at 15.0 ppm; cotton, undelinted seed at 0.4 ppm;
fruit, pome, group 11-10 at 0.4 ppm; fruit, small fruit vine climbing,
except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F at 0.7 ppm; fruit, stone, group
12-12 at 1.5 ppm; grape, raisins at 0.8 ppm; mint at 10.0 ppm;
vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 at 0.3 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8-
10 at 0.3 ppm; vegetable, legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A at 0.4
ppm; vegetables, legumes, dried shelled pea and bean (except soybean)
subgroup 6C at 0.3 ppm; vegetables, legumes, succulent shelled pea and
bean subgroup 6B at 0.02 ppm; beef, fat at 0.05 ppm; pork, fat at 0.05
ppm; sheep, fat at 0.05 ppm; milk at 0.01 ppm; liver at 0.02 p.m.; and
kidney at 0.01 ppm. That document referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Gowan Company, LLC, the registrant, which is available in
the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. EPA received one favorable
comment in response to the Notice of Filing from the Northwest
Horticultural Council in support of establishing tolerances for fruit,
pome, group 11-10 and fruit, stone, group 12-12.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
modified the commodity definitions and the tolerance levels for many of
the proposed uses. Additionally, EPA is increasing the current
tolerance level for citrus, oil and is not establishing tolerances on
alfalfa, cotton, corn, and livestock commodities. The reasons for the
changes and modifications are further 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 fenazaquin including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with fenazaquin follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children.
The most consistently observed effects of fenazaquin exposure
across species, sexes, and treatment durations were decreases in body
weight, food consumption, and food efficiency. The effects on body
weight and food consumption were consistent with the commonly observed
effects for compounds that disrupt mitochondrial respiration. Other
effects noted were mild dehydration and certain clinical signs seen at
relatively high dose levels in the acute activity, sluggish arousal,
unusual posture, abnormal gait, and altered response to auditory
stimuli were seen in the absence of any neuropathological changes and
were not considered to be related to neurotoxicity. In a 90-day study
in hamsters, treated animals had an increased incidence of testicular
hypospermatogenesis and reduced testicular and prostate weight;
however, these findings were not replicated in the hamster
carcinogenicity study which suggest the effects were transient or
reversible.
Fenazaquin did not cause any developmental or reproductive toxicity
at the doses tested in rats and rabbits. In the rat study,
developmental toxicity was not observed in the presence of maternal
toxicity (i.e. decreases in body weight gain, food consumption, and
food efficiency). In the rabbit study, no developmental or maternal
toxicity was seen. In the reproduction study, systemic toxicity
manifested in parental animals as excessive salivation and decreased
body weight and food intake; and in offspring as decreased body weight
gain; and there was no observed reproductive toxicity. Therefore, there
is no developmental toxicity or reproductive susceptibility with
respect to fetal and developing young animals with in utero and
postnatal exposures.
Carcinogenicity was evaluated in the hamster instead of the mouse
because the hamster was found to be more sensitive to the effects of
fenazaquin than mice due to slower elimination kinetics for hamster. In
a three-month feeding study in the mouse, it was found that 6-22x
higher dose levels were required to elicit a comparable effect in mice
than in the hamster. The results of the rat and hamster carcinogenicity
studies demonstrated no increase in treatment-related tumor incidence.
Therefore, fenazaquin was classified as ``not likely to be carcinogenic
to humans.''
Fenazaquin did not cause mutagenicity, genotoxicity, neurotoxicity,
or immunotoxicity. Fenazaquin did not demonstrate any systemic toxicity
in a 21-day dermal toxicity study in rabbits up to the limit dose
(1,000 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day)).
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by fenazaquin 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 ``Fenazaquin: Human Health Risk
Assessment in Support of Proposed Uses on Avocado, Bushberry Subgroup
13-07B, Caneberry Subgroup 13-07A, Citrus Fruit Group 10-10, Cucurbit
Vegetables Group 9, Fruiting Vegetables Group 8-10, Edible-Podded
Legume Vegetable Subgroup 6A, Succulent Pea And Bean Subgroup 6B, Dried
Shelled Pea And Bean (Except Soybean) Subgroup 6C, Low Growing Berry
Subgroup 13-07G, Mint, Pome Fruit Group 11-10, Small Fruit Vine
Climbing Subgroup, Except Fuzzy Kiwifruit 13-07F, and Stone Fruit Group
12-12'' in pages 11-17 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0673.
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
[[Page 14619]]
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 fenazaquin used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B. of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of May 6, 2015 (80 FR 25953) (FRL-
9925-97).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to fenazaquin, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing fenazaquin tolerances in 40 CFR
180.632. EPA assessed dietary exposures from fenazaquin 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 fenazaquin. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used the
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity
Intake Database (DEEM-FCID) Version 3.16. This software uses 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 assumed
tolerance-level residues, DEEM default processing factors for tomato
(paste and juice), dried apple, dried pear, dried apricot, cherry
juice, plum/prune juice, and dried coconut, and 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) for all proposed and registered uses.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the DEEM-FCID Version 3.16. This software uses
USDA's NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed
tolerance-level residues, DEEM default processing factors for tomato
(paste and juice), dried apple, dried pear, dried apricot, cherry
juice, plum/prune juice, and dried coconut, and 100 percent crop
treated (PCT) for all proposed and registered uses.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that fenazaquin 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.
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the
dietary assessment for fenazaquin. Tolerance-level residues and/or 100%
CT were assumed for all food commodities.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. In drinking water, the
residues of concern are fenazaquin (parent) and two metabolites:
Metabolite M29 or 2-(4-{2-[(2-hydroxyquinazolin-4-
yl)oxy]ethyl{time} phenyl)-2-methylpropanoic acid and its tautomer 2-
methyl-2-(4-{2-[(2-oxo-1,2-dihydroquinazolin-4-
yl)oxy]ethyl{time} phenyl)propanoic acid; and Metabolite 1 or 4-[2-(4-
tert-butyl-phenyl)-ethoxy]-quinazolin-2-ol and its tautomer 4-[2-(4-
tert-butylphenyl)ethoxy]quinazolin-2(1H)-one..
Although a screening level drinking water assessment (DWA) was
conducted, EPA used the solubility limit of fenazaquin at 20 [deg]C,
102 parts per billion (ppb), in place of EDWCs from the modeling that
are well below the solubility limit of fenazaquin, for the proposed new
uses and rate increases in the human health risk assessment. This
concentration is not representative of anticipated exposures in
drinking water, but is used as an upper bound limit to represent the
potential exposure to fenazaquin and the two additional residues of
concern.
The solubility limit of fenazaquin at 20 [deg]C, 102 ppb, was
directly entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary
risk assessment, the water concentration value of 102 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration of value 102 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).
Fenazaquin is currently registered for the following uses that
could result in residential exposures: Ornamental plants. There is a
potential for exposure associated with handling (i.e., mixing, loading
and applying), as well as post-application exposure from the use of
fenazaquin on ornamental plants. However, for residential exposure
associated with handlers, all registered fenazaquin product labels with
residential use sites (e.g., ornamental plants) require that handlers
wear specific clothing (e.g., long-sleeve shirt/long pants/chemical
resistant gloves) and/or use personal protective equipment (PPE).
Therefore, the Agency has made the assumption that these products are
not for homeowner use, and has not conducted a quantitative residential
handler assessment. With respect to the potential residential post-
application exposure from the use of fenazaquin on ornamental plants,
since there is (1) no adverse systemic hazard via the dermal route of
exposure; (2) inhalation exposures are typically negligible in outdoor
settings; and (3) there is no incidental oral exposure expected from
fenazaquin use on ornamental plants, a residential post-application
assessment is unnecessary. Furthermore, since the extent to which young
children engage in activities associated with these areas or utilize
these areas for prolonged periods of play is low, significant non-
dietary ingestion exposure is not expected. Further information
regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential
exposures may be found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' EPA has not found
fenazaquin to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other
substances, and fenazaquin does not
[[Page 14620]]
appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For
the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
fenazaquin does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA 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. Susceptibility/sensitivity
in the developing animals was evaluated in developmental toxicity
studies in rats and rabbits as well as a reproduction and fertility
study in rats. The data showed no evidence of increased sensitivity/
susceptibility in the developing or young animal. Clear NOAELs and
LOAELs are available for all the parental and 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 were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for fenazaquin is complete.
ii. There is no indication that fenazaquin is a neurotoxic chemical
and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional Uncertainty Factors (UFs) to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no concern for susceptibility in infants and young
children.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were based on 100% CT
and tolerance level residues for both the acute and chronic dietary
exposure. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions when using the
solubility limit of fenazaquin to account for exposure to fenazaquin in
drinking water. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure
and risks posed by fenazaquin.
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 fenazaquin will occupy 31% of the aPAD for children 1-2 years old,
the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
fenazaquin from food and water will utilize 37% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure. There are no residential uses for fenazaquin which contribute
to the aggregate exposure.
3. Short-term and intermediate-term risk. Short-term and
intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account short-term and
intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Because there
is no toxicological hazard via the dermal route of exposure for
fenazaquin, short-term and intermediate-term aggregate exposure
consists solely of chronic exposure to food and water, which is below
the Agency's level of concern.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies, fenazaquin 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 fenazaquin residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate analytical methods are available for enforcing fenazaquin
tolerances on plant commodities. The high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC) method with tandem mass spectrometry detection
(HPLC/MS-MS) method is the same as that used for data collection and
has been shown to be acceptable over a range of commodities. The method
has undergone successful independent laboratory confirmation and radio
validation. The ion transitions monitored for fenazaquin are m/z 307.0
[rarr] 161.2 for (quantitation) and m/z 307.0 [rarr] 147.2
(confirmation). The LOQ of the method was determined to be 0.01 ppm for
fenazaquin. The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical
Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft.
Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address:
[email protected].
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The Codex has not established MRLs for fenazaquin.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-for Tolerances
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing tolerances for the following commodities requested using
the Agency's preferred commodity terminology: Instead of establishing a
tolerance for grape, raisins as requested, the Agency is establishing a
tolerance for grape, raisin; revising fruit, low
[[Page 14621]]
growing berry, subgroup 13-07G to berry, low growing, subgroup 13-07G;
revising the requested mint to peppermint, fresh leaves and spearmint,
fresh leaves; revising the requested vegetables, legumes, succulent
shelled pea and bean subgroup 6B to pea and bean, succulent shelled,
subgroup 6B; revising vegetables, legumes, dried shelled pea and bean
(except soybean) subgroup 6C to pea and bean, dried shelled, except
soybean, subgroup 6C. In addition, based on supporting data, the Agency
is establishing tolerance levels higher than requested for fruit,
stone, group 12-12 at 2 ppm and for fruit, pome, group 11-10 at 0.6
ppm. In addition, because the current residue data supporting fruit,
citrus, group 10-10 indicates that residues concentrate in citrus, oil,
EPA is establishing a tolerance for fruit, citrus, group 10-10, oil
consistent with the requirements in 40 CFR 180.40(f)(1). This tolerance
supersedes the existing tolerance for citrus, oil, so EPA is removing
that tolerance. The Agency is also establishing tolerances and revising
current tolerance levels consistent the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) maximum residue limits calculator.
Finally, due to a lack of supporting data, EPA is not establishing any
tolerances for alfalfa, forage; alfalfa, hay; corn, field, forage;
corn, field, aspirated grain fractions; corn, field, grain; corn,
field, refined oil; corn, field, stover; corn, sweet, forage; corn,
sweet, grain; cotton, gin byproducts; cotton, undelinted seed; beef,
fat; pork, fat; sheep, fat; liver; kidney; and milk.
D. International Trade Considerations
In this rule, EPA is revising the commodity definition of and
reducing the existing tolerance for citrus commodities as follows:
Fruit, citrus, group 10 except grapefruit will become fruit, citrus,
group 10-10 and the tolerance will be revised from 0.5 ppm to 0.4 ppm.
The Agency is reducing this tolerance based on review of available
data. This reduction in tolerance level is not discriminatory; the same
food safety standard contained in the FFDCA applies equally to
domestically produced and imported foods.
In accordance with the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Sanitary
and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Agreement, EPA will notify the WTO of
its tolerance revision. In addition, the SPS Agreement requires that
Members provide a ``reasonable interval'' between the publication of a
regulation subject to the Agreement and its entry into force in order
to allow time for producers in exporting Member countries to adapt to
the new requirement. At this time, EPA is establishing an expiration
date for the existing tolerances to allow those tolerances remain in
effect for a period of six months after the effective date of this
final rule, in order to address this requirement. Prior to the
expiration date, residues of fenazaquin up to the existing tolerance
level will be permitted; after the expiration date, residues will need
to be compliant with the reduced tolerance level.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of fenazaquin,
4-[2-[4-(1,1-dimethylethyl)phenyl]ethoxy]quinazoline, in or on avocado
at 0.15 ppm; berry, low growing, subgroup 13-07G at 2 ppm; bushberry,
subgroup 13-07B at 0.8 ppm; caneberry, subgroup 13-07A at 0.7 ppm;
fruit, citrus, group 10-10, oil at 20 ppm; fruit, citrus, group 10-10
at 0.4 ppm; fruit, pome, group 11-10 at 0.6 ppm; fruit, small fruit
vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13-07F at 0.7 ppm;
fruit, stone, group 12-12 at 2 ppm; grape, raisin at 0.8 ppm; pea and
bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C at 0.3 ppm; pea and
bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B at 0.03 ppm; peppermint, fresh
leaves at 10 ppm; spearmint, fresh leaves at 10 ppm; vegetable,
cucurbit, group 9 at 0.3 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 at 0.3
ppm; and vegetable, legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A at 0.4 ppm. In
addition, EPA is removing the following tolerances: (1) Individual
tolerances for apple, pear, and cherry because they are superseded by
the new tolerances for pome fruit group 11-10 and stone fruit group 12-
12; (2) the group tolerance for fruit, citrus, group 10, except
grapefruit because it is superseded by a new group tolerance for fruit,
citrus, group 10-10; and (3) the tolerance for citrus, oil because it
is superseded by the new group tolerance for fruit, citrus, group 10-
10, oil. The Agency is setting a 6-month expiration date on the current
group tolerance for fruit, citrus, group 10, except grapefruit to
provide a reasonable interval for exporting countries to adjust to the
lower fruit, citrus, group 10-10 tolerance.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); or Executive Order 13771,
entitled ``Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs'' (82
FR 9339, February 3, 2017). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the 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
[[Page 14622]]
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: March 28, 2019.
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. 180.632, revise the table in paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 180.632 Fenazaquin; Tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almond, hulls............................................... 4
Avocado..................................................... 0.15
Berry, low growing, subgroup 13-07G......................... 2
Bushberry, subgroup 13-07B.................................. 0.8
Caneberry, subgroup 13-07A.................................. 0.7
Fruit, Citrus, Group 10 except Grapefruit \2\............... 0.5
Fruit, citrus, group 10-10.................................. 0.4
Fruit, citrus, group 10-10, oil............................. 20
Fruit, pome, group 11-10.................................... 0.6
Fruit, small vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 0.7
13-07F.....................................................
Fruit, stone, group 12-12................................... 2
Grape, raisin............................................... 0.8
Hop, dried cones............................................ 30
Nuts, Tree, Group 14-12..................................... 0.02
Pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C.... 0.3
Pea and bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B................ 0.03
Peppermint, fresh leaves.................................... 10
Pineapple \1\............................................... 0.2
Spearmint, fresh leaves..................................... 10
Tea, dried \1\.............................................. 9
Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9................................ 0.3
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10............................. 0.3
Vegetable, legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A............... 0.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no U.S. registrations as of May 25, 2017 for use on
pineapple and tea.
\2\ This tolerance expires on October 11, 2019.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-07173 Filed 4-10-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P