Clofentezine; Pesticide Tolerances, 24722-24726 [2019-11094]
Download as PDF
24722
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 29, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
MASSACHUSETTS NON REGULATORY
Applicable
geographic or
nonattainment
area
Name of non regulatory SIP
provision
*
Infrastructure SIP for 1997
Ozone NAAQS.
*
State submittal
date/effective date
EPA approved date 3
*
*
Statewide .............. February 9, 2018 ..
*
May 29, 2019 [Insert Federal Register citation].
Infrastructure SIP for 2008
Lead NAAQS.
Statewide ..............
February 9, 2018 ..
May 29, 2019 [Insert Federal Register citation].
Infrastructure SIP for 2008
Ozone NAAQS.
Statewide ..............
February 9, 2018 ..
May 29, 2019 [Insert Federal Register citation].
Infrastructure SIP for 2010
NO2 NAAQS.
Statewide ..............
February 9, 2018 ..
May 29, 2019 [Insert Federal Register citation].
Infrastructure SIP for 2010
SO2 NAAQS.
Statewide ..............
February 9, 2018 ..
May 29, 2019 [Insert Federal Register citation].
Explanations
*
*
Certain aspects relating to PSD for
prong
3
of
CAA
section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) which were conditionally approved on December 21,
2016 are now fully approved.
Certain aspects relating to PSD for
prong
3
of
CAA
section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) which were conditionally approved on December 21,
2016 are now fully approved.
Certain aspects relating to PSD for
prong
3
of
CAA
section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) which were conditionally approved on December 21,
2016 are now fully approved.
Certain aspects relating to PSD for
prong
3
of
CAA
section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) which were conditionally approved on December 21,
2016 are now fully approved.
Certain aspects relating to PSD for
prong
3
of
CAA
section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) which were conditionally approved on December 21,
2016 are now fully approved.
3 To determine the EPA effective date for a specific provision listed in this table, consult the Federal Register notice cited in this column for
the particular provision.
[FR Doc. 2019–10875 Filed 5–28–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2018–0275; FRL–9993–48]
Clofentezine; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of clofentezine in
or on guava. The Interregional Research
Project Number 4 (IR–4) requested this
tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective May
29, 2019. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
July 29, 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–2018–0275, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:21 May 28, 2019
Jkt 247001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 Publishing Office’s eCFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/
text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/
Title40/40tab_02.tpl. To access the
OCSPP test guidelines referenced in this
document electronically, please go to
https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/aboutoffice-chemical-safety-and-pollutionprevention-ocspp and select ‘‘Test
Methods and Guidelines.’’
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
E:\FR\FM\29MYR1.SGM
29MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 29, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
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–2018–0275 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 July 29, 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–
2018–0275, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/where-sendcomments-epa-dockets.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of July 24,
2018 (83 FR 34968) (FRL–9980–31),
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 8E8660) by The
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR–4), Rutgers, The State University of
New Jersey, 500 College Road East,
Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540. The
petition requested that 40 CFR 180.446
be amended by establishing tolerances
for residues of the insecticide
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:21 May 28, 2019
Jkt 247001
clofentezine, 3,6-bis(2-chlorphenyl)1,2,4,5-tetrazine, in or on guava at 1 part
per million (ppm). That document
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by Makhteshim Agan of North
America (ADAMA), the registrant,
which is available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. One comment was
received on the notice of filing. EPA’s
response to the comment is discussed in
Unit IV.C.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing a tolerance level for
residues in or on guava at 3 ppm rather
than 1 ppm as requested. The reason for
this change is explained in Unit IV.D.
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 clofentezine
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with clofentezine 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
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
24723
infants and children. The primary target
organ is the liver with secondary effects
on the thyroid. There is no concern for
increased quantitative or qualitative
susceptibility of the young following in
utero (rats and rabbits) and pre-and
post-natal exposure (rats) to
clofentezine. Clofentezine has been
classified as a possible human
carcinogen based on male rat thyroid
follicular cell adenoma and/or
carcinoma combined tumor rates. The
Q1* value for clofentezine using the 3⁄4
interspecies scaling factor is 3.76 × 10¥2
(mg/kg/day)¥1. Clofentezine is not
considered a mutagen.
Further detail on the toxicological
profile for clofentezine is discussed in
Unit II.A. of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of June 14, 2016
(81 FR 38605) (FRL–9942–23).
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by clofentezine 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
‘‘Clofentezine. Human-Health Risk
Assessment to Support a Section 3 New
Use on Guava’’ at page 14 in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2018–0275.
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://
E:\FR\FM\29MYR1.SGM
29MYR1
24724
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 29, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for clofentezine used for
human risk assessment is discussed in
Unit II.B of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of June 14, 2016
(81 FR 38606) (FRL–9942–23).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to clofentezine, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all
existing clofentezine tolerances in 40
CFR 180.446. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from clofentezine in food as
follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute
dietary exposure and risk assessments
are performed for a food-use pesticide if
a toxicological study has indicated the
possibility of an effect of concern
occurring as a result of a 1-day or single
exposure. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies
for clofentezine; therefore, a quantitative
acute dietary exposure assessment is
unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the United States Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA’s) 2003–2008
National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA used
anticipated residues (average residues
from available field trial data) for all
registered and proposed commodities as
well as empirical and updated 2018
default processing factors. Where data
were available, the Agency used percent
crop treated estimates; otherwise, EPA
assumed 100 percent crop treated.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data cited in
Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that
clofentezine should be classified as
‘‘Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’
and a linear approach has been used to
quantify cancer risk. Cancer risk was
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:21 May 28, 2019
Jkt 247001
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, and 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 average
PCT for existing uses as follows:
Almonds: 5%; apples: 2.5%; apricots:
2.5%; cherries: 5%; grapes: 1%;
nectarines: 5%; peaches: 5%; pears: 5%;
and walnuts: 5%.
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%.
The Agency believes that the three
conditions discussed in Unit III.C.1.iv.
have been met. With respect to
Condition a, PCT estimates are derived
from Federal and private market survey
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
data, which are reliable and have a valid
basis. The Agency is reasonably certain
that the percentage of the food treated
is not likely to be an underestimation.
As to Conditions b and c, regional
consumption information and
consumption information for significant
subpopulations is taken into account
through EPA’s computer-based model
for evaluating the exposure of
significant subpopulations including
several regional groups. Use of this
consumption information in EPA’s risk
assessment process ensures that EPA’s
exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant
subpopulation group and allows the
Agency to be reasonably certain that no
regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those
estimated by the Agency. Other than the
data available through national food
consumption surveys, EPA does not
have available reliable information on
the regional consumption of food to
which clofentezine may be applied in a
particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for clofentezine in drinking water.
These simulation models take into
account data on the physical, chemical,
and fate/transport characteristics of
clofentezine. Further information
regarding EPA drinking water models
used in pesticide exposure assessment
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/
pesticide-science-and-assessingpesticide-risks/about-water-exposuremodels-used-pesticide.
Based on the First Index Reservoir
Screening Tool (FIRST) and Pesticide
Root Zone Model Ground Water
(PRZM–GW) models, the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)
of clofentezine acute exposures are
estimated to be 7.59 parts per billion
(ppb) for surface water and less than
0.05 ppb for ground water. For chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments,
the EDWCs are estimated to be 0.062
ppb for surface water and less than 0.05
ppb for ground water. For chronic
exposures for cancer assessments, the
EDWC is estimated to be 0.025 ppb for
surface.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration value of 0.062 ppb
was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For cancer dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration
value of 0.025 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water.
E:\FR\FM\29MYR1.SGM
29MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 29, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
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).
Clofentezine is not registered for any
specific use patterns that would result
in residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found clofentezine to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
clofentezine does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that clofentezine does not have
a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/cumulativeassessment-risk-pesticides.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There is no concern for increased
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility
of the young following in utero (rats and
rabbits) and pre-and post-natal exposure
(rats) to clofentezine.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show the safety of
infants and children would be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:21 May 28, 2019
Jkt 247001
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for
clofentezine is complete.
ii. There is no indication that
clofentezine is a neurotoxic chemical
and there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
clofentezine results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies or
in young rats in the 2-generation
reproduction study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
EPA made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground and surface
water modeling used to assess exposure
to clofentezine in drinking water. These
assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by
clofentezine.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk
assessment takes into account acute
exposure estimates from dietary
consumption of food and drinking
water. No adverse effect resulting from
a single oral exposure was identified
and no acute dietary endpoint was
selected. Therefore, clofentezine is not
expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to clofentezine
from food and water will utilize less
than 1% of the cPAD for the general
U.S. population and all population
subgroups. There are no residential uses
for clofentezine.
3. Short- and Intermediate-term risk.
Short- and intermediate-term aggregate
exposure takes into account short- and
intermediate-term residential exposure
plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Short- and
intermediate-term adverse effects were
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
24725
identified; however, clofentezine is not
registered for any use patterns that
would result in short- or intermediateterm residential exposure. Short- and
intermediate-term risk is assessed based
on short- and intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no
short- or 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 short- or intermediate-term risk),
no further assessment of short- or
intermediate-term risk is necessary, and
EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk
assessment for evaluating short- and
intermediate-term risk for clofentezine.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
cancer exposure, EPA has concluded
that by applying the Q1* of 3.76 × 10¥2
(mg/kg/day)¥1 to the exposure value
results in a cancer risk estimate of 3.9
× 10¥7 for adults. 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.
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 clofentezine
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC)) is available to
enforce the tolerance expression. The
limit of quantitation (LOQ) and limit of
detection (LOD) were determined to be
0.01 ppm and 0.003 ppm, respectively.
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
E:\FR\FM\29MYR1.SGM
29MYR1
24726
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 29, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
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 an
MRL for clofentezine on guava.
C. Response to Comments
One comment was received on the
Notice of Filing expressing concern
about pollution in cities due to human
waste. The comment did not raise any
issue related to the Agency’s safety
determination for clofentezine
tolerances. The receipt of this comment
is acknowledged; however, this
comment is not relevant to this action.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
The Agency is establishing a tolerance
for residues of clofentezine in or on
guava at 3 ppm, rather than 1 ppm as
requested. The storage stability data
indicated a low average concurrent
recovery of residues in guava. To
account for the low storage stability
recoveries, the Agency applied a factor
of 3X to the average field trial values,
resulting in a calculation of higher
residues on guava and a need for a
higher tolerance level.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established
for residues of clofentezine, 3,6-bis(2chlorphenyl)-1,2,4,5-tetrazine, in or on
guava at 3 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes 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 this action
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:21 May 28, 2019
Jkt 247001
considered a regulatory action under
Executive Order 13771, entitled
‘‘Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs’’ (82 FR 9339, February
3, 2017). This action does not contain
any information collections subject to
OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.), nor does it require any special
considerations under Executive Order
12898, entitled ‘‘Federal Actions to
Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance 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
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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: May 21, 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 § 180.446, add alphabetically the
entry ‘‘Guava’’ to the table in paragraph
(a)(1) to read as follows:
■
§ 180.446 Clofentezine; tolerances for
residues.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
Parts per
million
Commodity
*
*
*
*
Guava ...................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
3
*
*
[FR Doc. 2019–11094 Filed 5–28–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR Part 64
[Docket ID FEMA–2019–0003; Internal
Agency Docket No. FEMA–8581]
Suspension of Community Eligibility
Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This rule identifies
communities where the sale of flood
insurance has been authorized under
the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) that are scheduled for
suspension on the effective dates listed
within this rule because of
noncompliance with the floodplain
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\29MYR1.SGM
29MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 103 (Wednesday, May 29, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24722-24726]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11094]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0275; FRL-9993-48]
Clofentezine; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
clofentezine in or on guava. The Interregional Research Project Number
4 (IR-4) requested this tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective May 29, 2019. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before July 29, 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-2018-0275, 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
Publishing Office's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl. To access the OCSPP
test guidelines referenced in this document electronically, please go
to https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/about-office-chemical-safety-and-pollution-prevention-ocspp and select ``Test Methods and Guidelines.''
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
[[Page 24723]]
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-2018-0275 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
July 29, 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-2018-0275, by one of
the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/where-send-comments-epa-dockets.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of July 24, 2018 (83 FR 34968) (FRL-9980-
31), 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
8E8660) by The Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), Rutgers,
The State University of New Jersey, 500 College Road East, Suite 201W,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.446 be
amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide
clofentezine, 3,6-bis(2-chlorphenyl)-1,2,4,5-tetrazine, in or on guava
at 1 part per million (ppm). That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Makhteshim Agan of North America (ADAMA), the
registrant, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. One comment was received on the notice of filing.
EPA's response to the comment is discussed in Unit IV.C.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing a tolerance level for residues in or on guava at 3 ppm
rather than 1 ppm as requested. The reason for this change is explained
in Unit IV.D.
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 clofentezine including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with clofentezine 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 primary target organ is the liver with secondary effects
on the thyroid. There is no concern for increased quantitative or
qualitative susceptibility of the young following in utero (rats and
rabbits) and pre-and post-natal exposure (rats) to clofentezine.
Clofentezine has been classified as a possible human carcinogen based
on male rat thyroid follicular cell adenoma and/or carcinoma combined
tumor rates. The Q1* value for clofentezine using the \3/4\
interspecies scaling factor is 3.76 x 10-\2\ (mg/kg/
day)-\1\. Clofentezine is not considered a mutagen.
Further detail on the toxicological profile for clofentezine is
discussed in Unit II.A. of the final rule published in the Federal
Register of June 14, 2016 (81 FR 38605) (FRL-9942-23).
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by clofentezine 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 ``Clofentezine. Human-Health Risk
Assessment to Support a Section 3 New Use on Guava'' at page 14 in
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0275.
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://
[[Page 24724]]
www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for clofentezine used for
human risk assessment is discussed in Unit II.B of the final rule
published in the Federal Register of June 14, 2016 (81 FR 38606) (FRL-
9942-23).
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to clofentezine, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances as well as all existing clofentezine tolerances in 40
CFR 180.446. EPA assessed dietary exposures from clofentezine in food
as follows:
i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide if a toxicological
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. No such effects were
identified in the toxicological studies for clofentezine; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the United States
Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) 2003-2008 National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As
to residue levels in food, EPA used anticipated residues (average
residues from available field trial data) for all registered and
proposed commodities as well as empirical and updated 2018 default
processing factors. Where data were available, the Agency used percent
crop treated estimates; otherwise, EPA assumed 100 percent crop
treated.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data cited in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that clofentezine should be classified as ``Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans'' and a linear approach has been used to
quantify cancer risk. Cancer risk was 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, and 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 average PCT for existing uses as follows:
Almonds: 5%; apples: 2.5%; apricots: 2.5%; cherries: 5%; grapes: 1%;
nectarines: 5%; peaches: 5%; pears: 5%; and walnuts: 5%.
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%.
The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed in Unit
III.C.1.iv. have been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates
are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are
reliable and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that
the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an
underestimation. As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption
information and consumption information for significant subpopulations
is taken into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating
the exposure of significant subpopulations including several regional
groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment
process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate
exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency
to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to
residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than
the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does
not have available reliable information on the regional consumption of
food to which clofentezine may be applied in a particular area.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for clofentezine in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of clofentezine. Further information regarding EPA
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
Based on the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) and
Pesticide Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM-GW) models, the estimated
drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of clofentezine acute exposures
are estimated to be 7.59 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and
less than 0.05 ppb for ground water. For chronic exposures for non-
cancer assessments, the EDWCs are estimated to be 0.062 ppb for surface
water and less than 0.05 ppb for ground water. For chronic exposures
for cancer assessments, the EDWC is estimated to be 0.025 ppb for
surface.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 0.062 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water. For cancer dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 0.025 ppb was used to
assess the contribution to drinking water.
[[Page 24725]]
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). Clofentezine is not
registered for any specific use patterns that would result in
residential exposure.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found clofentezine to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and clofentezine does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
clofentezine does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no concern for
increased quantitative or qualitative susceptibility of the young
following in utero (rats and rabbits) and pre-and post-natal exposure
(rats) to clofentezine.
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 clofentezine is complete.
ii. There is no indication that clofentezine is a neurotoxic
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that clofentezine results in increased
susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction
study.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground
and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to clofentezine in
drinking water. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure
and risks posed by clofentezine.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists.
1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore,
clofentezine is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
clofentezine from food and water will utilize less than 1% of the cPAD
for the general U.S. population and all population subgroups. There are
no residential uses for clofentezine.
3. Short- and Intermediate-term risk. Short- and intermediate-term
aggregate exposure takes into account short- and intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background exposure level). Short- and
intermediate-term adverse effects were identified; however,
clofentezine is not registered for any use patterns that would result
in short- or intermediate-term residential exposure. Short- and
intermediate-term risk is assessed based on short- and intermediate-
term residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure. Because there
is no short- or 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 short- or intermediate-term risk), no further assessment of
short- or intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating short- and intermediate-
term risk for clofentezine.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for cancer exposure, EPA has
concluded that by applying the Q1* of 3.76 x 10-2
(mg/kg/day)-1 to the exposure value results in a cancer risk
estimate of 3.9 x 10-7 for adults. 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.
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 clofentezine residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC)) is available to enforce the tolerance
expression. The limit of quantitation (LOQ) and limit of detection
(LOD) were determined to be 0.01 ppm and 0.003 ppm, respectively.
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
[[Page 24726]]
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 an MRL for clofentezine on guava.
C. Response to Comments
One comment was received on the Notice of Filing expressing concern
about pollution in cities due to human waste. The comment did not raise
any issue related to the Agency's safety determination for clofentezine
tolerances. The receipt of this comment is acknowledged; however, this
comment is not relevant to this action.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
The Agency is establishing a tolerance for residues of clofentezine
in or on guava at 3 ppm, rather than 1 ppm as requested. The storage
stability data indicated a low average concurrent recovery of residues
in guava. To account for the low storage stability recoveries, the
Agency applied a factor of 3X to the average field trial values,
resulting in a calculation of higher residues on guava and a need for a
higher tolerance level.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established for residues of clofentezine,
3,6-bis(2-chlorphenyl)-1,2,4,5-tetrazine, in or on guava at 3 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes 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 this action considered a
regulatory action under Executive Order 13771, entitled ``Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs'' (82 FR 9339, February 3,
2017). This action does not contain any information collections subject
to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), nor does it require any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance 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: May 21, 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. 180.446, add alphabetically the entry ``Guava'' to the
table in paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.446 Clofentezine; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Guava.................................................. 3
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-11094 Filed 5-28-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P