Ethiprole; Pesticide Tolerances, 30933-30939 [2019-13546]
Download as PDF
30933
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by August 27, 2019. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See CAA
section 307(b)(2).
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: May 28, 2019.
Mary S. Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42.U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
a. Adding, in paragraph (d), the entry
‘‘Louisville Gas and Electric Mill Creek
Electric Generating Station’’ at the end
of the table; and
■ b. Adding, in paragraph (e), the entries
‘‘2010 1-hour SO2 Attainment
Demonstration for the Jefferson County
Area,’’ ‘‘2010 1-hour SO2 Jefferson
County Nonattainment Plan for
172(c)(3) 2011 Base-Year Emissions
Inventory’’, and ‘‘2010 1-hour SO2
Jefferson County Nonattainment Plan for
172(c)(5) New Source Review
Requirements’’ at the end of the table.
The additions read as follows:
■
§ 52.920
Subpart S—Kentucky
*
■
2. Section 52.920 is amended by:
Identification of plan.
*
*
(d) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED KENTUCKY SOURCE-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
Name of source
*
*
*
Louisville Gas and Electric Mill
Creek Electric Generating Station.
*
*
*
*
State
effective date
Permit No.
*
145–97–TV(R3) ...........................
*
EPA approval date
*
6/23/2017
Explanations
*
6/28/2019 [Insert citation
of publication].
*
Plant-wide Specific condition S1-Standards, S2Monitoring and Record
Keeping and S3-Reporting in title V permit 145–
97–TV(R3) for EGU U1,
U2, U3 and U4.
(e) * * *
EPA-APPROVED KENTUCKY NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS
Name of non-regulatory SIP provision
*
Applicable geographic or nonattainment area
*
*
2010 1-hour SO2 Attainment
Demonstration for the Jefferson County Area.
2010 1-hour SO2 Jefferson
County Nonattainment Plan for
172(c)(3)
2011
Base-Year
Emissions Inventory.
2010 1-hour SO2 Jefferson
County Nonattainment Plan for
172(c)(5) New Source Review
Requirements.
EPA approval date
*
*
6/28/2019 [Insert citation of
publication].
Jefferson County .........................
6/23/2017
6/28/2019 [Insert citation of
publication].
Jefferson County .........................
6/23/2017
6/28/2019 [Insert citation of
publication].
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0493; FRL–9985–41]
Ethiprole; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
16:17 Jun 27, 2019
*
6/23/2017
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Explanations
Jefferson County .........................
[FR Doc. 2019–13736 Filed 6–27–19; 8:45 am]
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
State
submittal
date/effective
date
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ACTION:
*
Final rule.
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of the insecticide
ethiprole in or on coffee, green bean.
Bayer CropScience LP requested these
tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective June
28, 2019. Objections and requests for
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\28JNR1.SGM
28JNR1
30934
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
hearings must be received on or before
August 27, 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).
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0493, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket)
in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460–0001. The Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael L. Goodis, P.E., Director,
Registration Division (750P), 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.
ADDRESSES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
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–2009–0493 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 August 27, 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–
2009–0493, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of October 24,
2018 (83 FR 53594) (FRL–9983–46),
EPA issued a document pursuant to
FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 7E8586) by Bayer
CropScience LP, P.O. Box 12014, 2 T.W.
Alexander Dr., Research Triangle Park,
NC 27709–2014. The petition requested
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
that 40 CFR 180.652 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of
the insecticide ethiprole, 5-amino-1[2,6-dichloro-4(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4(ethylsulfinyl)-1H-pyrazole-3carbonitrile, in or on coffee (green
beans) and roasted coffee and instant
coffee at 0.1 parts per million (ppm).
That document referenced a summary of
the petition prepared by Bayer
CropScience LP, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. These tolerances
were requested to cover residues of
ethiprole in or on coffee resulting from
uses of this pesticide on coffee outside
the United States. There is no current
U.S. registration for use of ethiprole on
coffee. The only comment submitted to
this docket supported this rulemaking.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has
concluded that tolerances are not
needed for the processed coffee
commodities since available data
demonstrate that residues of ethiprole
did not concentrate in these processed
commodities.
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 ethiprole
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
E:\FR\FM\28JNR1.SGM
28JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with ethiprole follows.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
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.
Ethiprole has a low acute toxicity via
the oral, dermal, and inhalation routes
of exposure, and is not a skin sensitizer
nor a skin or eye irritant. In the
mammalian toxicology database, the
critical effects of ethiprole are liver
toxicity and thyroid toxicity. The rat
was the most sensitive species overall
after administration of ethiprole.
Evidence of hepatotoxicity is seen in the
rat, dog, and mouse and was manifested
as increased liver weight and
hepatocellular hypertrophy and changes
in clinical chemistry such as increased
alanine transaminase and alkaline
phosphates activities; increased
cholesterol and triglycerides levels; and
increased total protein concentration.
Thyroid toxicity was observed in the rat
and was manifested as increased thyroid
weight, thyroid follicular hypertrophy
along with higher TSH plasma levels,
and reduced T4 (thyroxine) plasma
levels. Mechanism studies of thyroid
toxicity suggested that ethiprole acts by
disrupting thyroid hormone
homeostasis and indirectly influences
the thyroid by inducing the hepatic
microsomal enzyme T4- glucuronyl
transferase.
Ethiprole is neither a reproductive nor
a developmental toxicant. Although no
teratogenic effects were observed in the
existing database, there is uncertainty
regarding the potential impact of
ethiprole on thyroid hormone
homeostasis in the developing
organism.
In the acute neurotoxicity study,
clinical signs showed consistent effects
that might be anticipated for a chemical
interacting with neurotransmitter
chloride channels, including low
arousal levels, increased eye closure,
increased incidence of body tremors,
and decreased rearing counts in females
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
at the mid dose. However, no
neurotoxicity effects were noted in the
subchronic neurotoxicity study up to
and including the highest dose of 400
ppm (33.0 mg/kg/day). There were no
effects on neuropathology in any of the
studies.
Based on a battery of mutagenicity
studies, ethiprole is not considered to be
genotoxic. In accordance with the EPA’s
Final Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk
Assessment (March 2005), ethiprole is
classified as ‘‘Suggestive Evidence of
Carcinogenicity, but Not Sufficient to
Assess Human Carcinogenicity
Potential’’ based on increased
incidences of hepatocellular adenomas
in females at the highest dose tested in
the carcinogenicity study in mice. While
the evidence from animal data is
suggestive of carcinogenicity, a cancer
risk to humans from dietary exposure to
ethiprole is of low concern, and a
nonlinear approach is appropriate for
assessing potential cancer risk based on
the following weight-of-evidence
considerations:
1. The liver tumors in mice were
benign with no progression to
malignancy;
2. The thyroid tumors in rats were
also benign (with no progression to
malignancy), and the increase in the
tumor incidences at the high dose did
not reach statistical significance when
compared to controls;
3. In both species (mice and rats),
tumors were observed only at the high
dose level (i.e., there was a lack of
evidence of a dose-response
relationship);
4. There is no concern for
mutagenicity/genotoxicity;
5. The no-observed-adverse-effect
level (NOAEL) of 0.85 milligrams/
kilograms/day (mg/kg/day) used for
deriving the cRfD is approximately 86fold lower than the dose (73 mg/kg/day)
that induced benign tumors in mice;
and
6. The reduction of the Food Quality
Protection Act Safety Factor (FQPA SF)
to 1x yields a chronic Population
Adjusted Dose (cPAD) of 0.03 mg/kg/
day. The Agency has determined that
the cPAD will adequately account for all
chronic effects, including
carcinogenicity, likely to result from
exposure to ethiprole.
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30935
More detailed information on the
studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by ethiprole as
well as the NOAEL and the LOAEL from
the toxicological studies can be found in
the document entitled, ‘‘Ethiprole:
Human Health Risk Assessment for a
Proposed Tolerance without U.S.
Registration in/on Imported Coffee,
Green Bean,’’ dated April 29, 2019, by
going to https://www.regulations.gov.
The referenced document is available in
the docket established by this action,
which is described under ADDRESSES.
Locate and click on the hyperlink for
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–
0493. Double-click on the document to
view the referenced information.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which no adverse effects are
observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for ethiprole used for human
risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of
this unit.
E:\FR\FM\28JNR1.SGM
28JNR1
30936
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR ETHIPROLE FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK
ASSESSMENT
Exposure/scenario
Acute Dietary (All populations)
Chronic Dietary (All populations).
Cancer Dietary (Oral, Dermal,
Inhalation).
Point of departure
and uncertainty/
safety factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for
risk assessment
Study and toxicological effects
NOAEL = 35 mg/kg/
day.
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Combined UFs =
100x
NOAEL = 0.85 mg/
kg/day.
UFA = 3x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Combined UFs =
30x
Acute RfD = 0.35
mg/kg/day.
aPAD = 0.35 mg/kg/
day
Acute Neurotoxicity in Rats Study.
LOAEL = 250 mg/kg/day based on decreased locomotor activity and functional observational battery (FOB) findings in both
sexes on the day of treatment.
Chronic RfD = 0.03
mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.03 mg/kg/
day
Combined Chronic/Carcinogenicity Oral (Dietary) Toxicity in
Rats.
LOAEL = 3.21/4.40 mg/kg/day M/F based on observed effects
in the thyroid and/or liver (histopathologic changes, increased
organ weights, and/or altered thyroid hormone or bilirubin
levels).
Classification: ‘‘Suggestive Evidence of Carcinogenicity, but Not Sufficient to Assess Human Carcinogenicity
Potential’’ Quantification using a cancer potency factor is not needed; a nonlinear approach based on the cRfD
is protective of potential cancer risk.
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effectlevel. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies).
UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies).
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
More detailed information on the
toxicological endpoints for ethiprole can
be found in the document entitled,
‘‘Ethiprole: Human Health Risk
Assessment for a Proposed Tolerance
without U.S. Registration in/on
Imported Coffee, Green Bean,’’ dated
April 29, 2019, by going to https://
www.regulations.gov. The referenced
document is available in the docket
established by this action, which is
described under ADDRESSES. Locate and
click on the hyperlink for docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0493.
Double-click on the document to view
the referenced information.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to ethiprole, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing
ethiprole tolerances in 40 CFR 180.652
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. In estimating acute dietary
(food and drinking water) exposure,
EPA used food consumption
information from the Dietary Exposure
Evaluation Model—Food Commodity
Intake Database (DEEM–FCIDTM,
Version 3.18), which incorporates 2003–
2008 consumption data from the United
States Department of Agriculture’s
(USDA’s) National Health and Nutrition
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America, (NHANES/WWEIA). An
unrefined, acute dietary exposure
assessment was conducted assuming
tolerance-level residues and assuming
100 percent crop treated (PCT).
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, EPA used DEEM–FCIDTM,
Version 3.18, which incorporates 2003–
2008 consumption data from the
USDA’s NHANES/WWEIA. An
unrefined chronic dietary risk analysis
was conducted assuming tolerance-level
residues and 100 PCT.
iii. Cancer. As explained in unit III.A.,
quantification of risk using a non-linear
approach (i.e., a cPAD) will adequately
account for all chronic toxicity,
including carcinogenicity, that could
result from exposure to ethiprole. No
separate exposure assessment pertaining
to cancer risk was performed for
ethiprole; rather, EPA relied on the
chronic exposure assessment described
in this Unit for assessing the risk of all
chronic effects, including cancer.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did
not use anticipated residue information
in the dietary assessment for ethiprole.
Tolerance-level residues and/or 100%
CT were assumed for all food
commodities.
More detailed information on the
acute and chronic dietary (food only)
exposure and risk assessment for
ethiprole can be found in the document
entitled, ‘‘Ethiprole: Human Health Risk
Assessment for a Proposed Tolerance
without U.S. Registration in/on
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Imported Coffee, Green Bean,’’ dated
April 29, 2019, by going to https://
www.regulations.gov. The referenced
document is available in the docket
established by this action, which is
described under ADDRESSES. Locate and
click on the hyperlink for docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0493.
Double-click on the document to view
the referenced information.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. Ethiprole and its degradates were
not considered for drinking water
assessment because ethiprole is not
registered for use in the U.S.; therefore,
exposure to residues of ethiprole in
drinking water is not expected.
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). Ethiprole
is not registered for any specific use
patterns that would result in residential
exposure.
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/
trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
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
E:\FR\FM\28JNR1.SGM
28JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’ EPA has not
made a common mechanism of toxicity
finding as to ethiprole and any other
substances, and ethiprole does not
appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action;
therefore, EPA has not assumed that
ethiprole has 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 the policy
statements released by EPA’s Office of
Pesticide Programs concerning common
mechanism determinations and
procedures for cumulating effects from
substances found to have a common
mechanism on EPA’s website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/.
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 are available to EPA support the
choice of a different safety factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
Although no teratogenic effects were
observed in the existing toxicology
database, there is uncertainty regarding
the potential impact of ethiprole on
thyroid hormone homeostasis in the
developing organism. Observations
demonstrated that thyroid hormones
were affected in several studies
throughout the ethiprole database.
Thyroid hormones may play a critical
role in the development of the nervous
system.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable hazard and exposure 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 toxicology database for
ethiprole is complete for establishing
tolerances without U.S. registration
purposes. Previously the Agency
determined that a CTA is required based
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
on the weight-of-evidence.
Subsequently, the registrant submitted a
request for a CTA waiver. Based on a
weight-of-evidence approach that
considered the relatively low exposure
to the highest exposed populations and
the fact that had the 10x been retained,
the exposure levels would still result in
estimated risks below the levels of
concern, the Agency concludes that a
CTA in pregnant animals, fetuses,
postnatal animals, and adult animals is
not required for ethiprole at this time.
ii. In mammals, no neurotoxic effects
were observed during the subchronic
neurotoxicity study in which adverse
effects of increased thyroid and liver
weights were observed in males and
females, respectively. The acute
neurotoxicity study showed decreased
locomotor activity (both sexes, day 1)
and the FOB findings in both sexes on
the day of treatment (4 hours after
dosing). The FOB findings included
increased tremors (females), decreased
grooming (both sexes), decreased
arousal alert (females), increased
number of animals for which no
assessment of gait was possible
(females), increased eye closure
(females), increased standing/sitting
hunched (females), decreased activity
and rearing counts (females), increased
hindlimb and forelimb grip strength
(males), decreased splay (females, day
1), and increased splay (males, day 8).
The similarity in the NOAELs from the
acute neurotoxicity and subchronic
neurotoxicity studies are consistent
with the metabolism data that
suggesting that ethiprole is not
accumulated in the system. Therefore, a
developmental neurotoxicity (DNT)
study is not required for ethiprole.
iii. There is no evidence that ethiprole
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 database for
ethiprole. The dietary assessment is
based on high end assumptions,
assuming tolerance-level residues and
100 PCT. The assessment will not
underestimate the exposure and risk
posed by ethiprole.
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). Since there are no
registered or proposed uses of ethiprole
that result in residential exposure, the
acute and chronic aggregate exposure
and risk assessments are equal to the
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30937
acute and chronic dietary exposure and
risk estimates (food only), respectively.
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. Using the exposure assumptions
described in this Unit for dietary and
non-dietary acute exposures, EPA has
concluded that acute dietary exposure
to ethiprole from food only will utilize
<1% of the aPAD for the general U.S.
population. The most highly-exposed
population subgroup, all infants (<1
year old), utilized 2.1% of the aPAD.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this Unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic dietary exposure to
ethiprole from food only will utilize
2.0% of the cPAD for the general U.S.
population. The most highly-exposed
population subgroup, all infants (<1
year old), utilized 5.7% of the cPAD.
Based on the explanation in Unit
III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to
residues of ethiprole is not expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). A short-term adverse
effect was identified; however, ethiprole
is not registered for any use patterns
that would result in short-term
residential exposure. Short-term risk is
assessed based on short-term residential
exposure plus chronic dietary exposure.
Because there is no short-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-term risk),
no further assessment of short-term risk
is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating short-term risk for ethiprole.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level). An
intermediate-term adverse effect was
identified; however, ethiprole is not
registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on intermediateterm residential exposure plus chronic
E:\FR\FM\28JNR1.SGM
28JNR1
30938
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure
and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for
ethiprole.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. As discussed in Unit III.A.,
EPA concluded that the nonlinear
approach for assessing potential cancer
risk from exposure to ethiprole is
appropriate. As noted in this Unit, the
chronic risk aggregate exposure to
ethiprole is below the Agency’s level of
concern; therefore, the Agency
concludes that there is not a cancer risk
of concern from exposure to ethiprole.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general U.S.
population, or to infants and children
from aggregate exposure to ethiprole
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
The HPLC/MS–MS enforcement
method, Method 01128, is acceptable for
determination of residues of ethiprole
and its sulfone metabolite RPA 097973
for data collection in plant
commodities. The GC–ECD method
(Report No. B003572) is suitable for
determining residues of parent ethiprole
and RPA in milk, eggs and tissues. The
FDA multiresidue method testing study
for ethiprole is adequate and indicates
that PAM multiresidue methods are not
suitable for enforcing tolerances for
residues of ethiprole.
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.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
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. Codex has not
established maximum residue limits
(MRLs) for residues of ethiprole in
coffee commodities; therefore, there are
no harmonization issues at this time.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established
for residues of the insecticide ethiprole,
5-amino-1-[2,6-dichloro-4(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4(ethylsulfinyl)-1H-pyrazole-3carbonitrile, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on coffee, green
bean at 0.1 ppm. EPA is also amending
the footnote in the table in paragraph (a)
to accommodate the coffee commodity.
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 it considered a
regulatory action under Executive Order
13771, entitled ‘‘Reducing Regulations
and Controlling Regulatory Costs’’ (82
FR 9339), February 3, 2017). This action
does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval
under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does
it require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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: June 19, 2019.
Michael Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
E:\FR\FM\28JNR1.SGM
28JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
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 § 180.652, revise paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
■
§ 180.652 Ethiprole; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of ethiprole,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities in
the table below. Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified below is to be
determined by measuring only
ethiprole, 5-amino-1-[2,6-dichloro-4(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4(ethylsulfinyl)-1H-pyrazole-3carbonitrile.
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)
Parts per
million
Commodity
Coffee, green bean 1 ..................
Rice, grain 1 ................................
Tea, dried 1 .................................
0.1
1.7
30
1 There are no U.S. registrations for this
commodity as of June 28, 2019.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2019–13546 Filed 6–27–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2018–0002; FRL–9994–51]
Mefentrifluconazole; Pesticide
Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of
mefentrifluconazole in or on multiple
commodities which are identified and
discussed later in this document. BASF
Corporation requested these tolerances
under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective June
28, 2019. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
August 27, 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).
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2018–0002, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket)
in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460–0001. The Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Goodis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460–0001; main telephone number:
(703) 305–7090; email address:
RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Publishing Office’s eCFR 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
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30939
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2018–0002 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
August 27, 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–
2018–0002, 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 May 18,
2018 (83 FR 23247) (FRL–9976–87),
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 7F8612) by BASF
Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, P.O. Box
13528, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27709–3528. The petition
requested to establish tolerances in 40
CFR part 180 for residues of the
fungicide mefentrifluconazole (BAS 750
F); 2-[4-(4-chlorophenoxy)-2(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-1-(1H-1,2,4triazole-1-yl)propan-2-ol] in or on the
following raw agricultural commodities:
almond, hulls at 4 parts per million
(ppm); barley, hay at 15 ppm; barley,
straw at 30 ppm; cattle, fat at 0.3 ppm;
E:\FR\FM\28JNR1.SGM
28JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 125 (Friday, June 28, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30933-30939]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13546]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0493; FRL-9985-41]
Ethiprole; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of the
insecticide ethiprole in or on coffee, green bean. Bayer CropScience LP
requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective June 28, 2019. Objections and
requests for
[[Page 30934]]
hearings must be received on or before August 27, 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-2009-0493, is available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and
additional information about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael L. Goodis, P.E., Director,
Registration Division (750P), 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-2009-0493 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
August 27, 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-2009-0493, by one of
the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of October 24, 2018 (83 FR 53594) (FRL-
9983-46), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
7E8586) by Bayer CropScience LP, P.O. Box 12014, 2 T.W. Alexander Dr.,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2014. The petition requested that 40
CFR 180.652 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the
insecticide ethiprole, 5-amino-1-[2,6-dichloro-4-
(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4-(ethylsulfinyl)-1H-pyrazole-3-carbonitrile,
in or on coffee (green beans) and roasted coffee and instant coffee at
0.1 parts per million (ppm). That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Bayer CropScience LP, the registrant, which is
available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. These tolerances
were requested to cover residues of ethiprole in or on coffee resulting
from uses of this pesticide on coffee outside the United States. There
is no current U.S. registration for use of ethiprole on coffee. The
only comment submitted to this docket supported this rulemaking.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
concluded that tolerances are not needed for the processed coffee
commodities since available data demonstrate that residues of ethiprole
did not concentrate in these processed commodities.
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 ethiprole including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action.
[[Page 30935]]
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with ethiprole
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.
Ethiprole has a low acute toxicity via the oral, dermal, and
inhalation routes of exposure, and is not a skin sensitizer nor a skin
or eye irritant. In the mammalian toxicology database, the critical
effects of ethiprole are liver toxicity and thyroid toxicity. The rat
was the most sensitive species overall after administration of
ethiprole. Evidence of hepatotoxicity is seen in the rat, dog, and
mouse and was manifested as increased liver weight and hepatocellular
hypertrophy and changes in clinical chemistry such as increased alanine
transaminase and alkaline phosphates activities; increased cholesterol
and triglycerides levels; and increased total protein concentration.
Thyroid toxicity was observed in the rat and was manifested as
increased thyroid weight, thyroid follicular hypertrophy along with
higher TSH plasma levels, and reduced T4 (thyroxine) plasma levels.
Mechanism studies of thyroid toxicity suggested that ethiprole acts by
disrupting thyroid hormone homeostasis and indirectly influences the
thyroid by inducing the hepatic microsomal enzyme T4- glucuronyl
transferase.
Ethiprole is neither a reproductive nor a developmental toxicant.
Although no teratogenic effects were observed in the existing database,
there is uncertainty regarding the potential impact of ethiprole on
thyroid hormone homeostasis in the developing organism.
In the acute neurotoxicity study, clinical signs showed consistent
effects that might be anticipated for a chemical interacting with
neurotransmitter chloride channels, including low arousal levels,
increased eye closure, increased incidence of body tremors, and
decreased rearing counts in females at the mid dose. However, no
neurotoxicity effects were noted in the subchronic neurotoxicity study
up to and including the highest dose of 400 ppm (33.0 mg/kg/day). There
were no effects on neuropathology in any of the studies.
Based on a battery of mutagenicity studies, ethiprole is not
considered to be genotoxic. In accordance with the EPA's Final
Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment (March 2005), ethiprole is
classified as ``Suggestive Evidence of Carcinogenicity, but Not
Sufficient to Assess Human Carcinogenicity Potential'' based on
increased incidences of hepatocellular adenomas in females at the
highest dose tested in the carcinogenicity study in mice. While the
evidence from animal data is suggestive of carcinogenicity, a cancer
risk to humans from dietary exposure to ethiprole is of low concern,
and a nonlinear approach is appropriate for assessing potential cancer
risk based on the following weight-of-evidence considerations:
1. The liver tumors in mice were benign with no progression to
malignancy;
2. The thyroid tumors in rats were also benign (with no progression
to malignancy), and the increase in the tumor incidences at the high
dose did not reach statistical significance when compared to controls;
3. In both species (mice and rats), tumors were observed only at
the high dose level (i.e., there was a lack of evidence of a dose-
response relationship);
4. There is no concern for mutagenicity/genotoxicity;
5. The no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) of 0.85 milligrams/
kilograms/day (mg/kg/day) used for deriving the cRfD is approximately
86-fold lower than the dose (73 mg/kg/day) that induced benign tumors
in mice; and
6. The reduction of the Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor
(FQPA SF) to 1x yields a chronic Population Adjusted Dose (cPAD) of
0.03 mg/kg/day. The Agency has determined that the cPAD will adequately
account for all chronic effects, including carcinogenicity, likely to
result from exposure to ethiprole.
More detailed information on the studies received and the nature of
the adverse effects caused by ethiprole as well as the NOAEL and the
LOAEL from the toxicological studies can be found in the document
entitled, ``Ethiprole: Human Health Risk Assessment for a Proposed
Tolerance without U.S. Registration in/on Imported Coffee, Green
Bean,'' dated April 29, 2019, by going to https://www.regulations.gov.
The referenced document is available in the docket established by this
action, which is described under ADDRESSES. Locate and click on the
hyperlink for docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0493. Double-click on
the document to view the referenced information.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for ethiprole used for
human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
[[Page 30936]]
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Ethiprole for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure
Exposure/scenario and uncertainty/ RfD, PAD, LOC for Study and toxicological effects
safety factors risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute Dietary (All populations).. NOAEL = 35 mg/kg/day Acute RfD = 0.35 mg/ Acute Neurotoxicity in Rats Study.
UFA = 10x........... kg/day. LOAEL = 250 mg/kg/day based on
UFH = 10x........... aPAD = 0.35 mg/kg/ decreased locomotor activity and
FQPA SF = 1x........ day. functional observational battery
Combined UFs = 100x. (FOB) findings in both sexes on
the day of treatment.
Chronic Dietary (All populations) NOAEL = 0.85 mg/kg/ Chronic RfD = 0.03 Combined Chronic/Carcinogenicity
day. mg/kg/day. Oral (Dietary) Toxicity in Rats.
UFA = 3x............ cPAD = 0.03 mg/kg/ LOAEL = 3.21/4.40 mg/kg/day M/F
UFH = 10x........... day. based on observed effects in the
FQPA SF = 1x........ thyroid and/or liver
Combined UFs = 30x.. (histopathologic changes,
increased organ weights, and/or
altered thyroid hormone or
bilirubin levels).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer Dietary (Oral, Dermal, Classification: ``Suggestive Evidence of Carcinogenicity, but Not Sufficient
Inhalation). to Assess Human Carcinogenicity Potential'' Quantification using a cancer
potency factor is not needed; a nonlinear approach based on the cRfD is
protective of potential cancer risk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. NOAEL = no-
observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose.
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among
members of the human population (intraspecies).
More detailed information on the toxicological endpoints for
ethiprole can be found in the document entitled, ``Ethiprole: Human
Health Risk Assessment for a Proposed Tolerance without U.S.
Registration in/on Imported Coffee, Green Bean,'' dated April 29, 2019,
by going to https://www.regulations.gov. The referenced document is
available in the docket established by this action, which is described
under ADDRESSES. Locate and click on the hyperlink for docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0493. Double-click on the document to view the
referenced information.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to ethiprole, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing ethiprole tolerances in 40 CFR
180.652 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. In estimating acute dietary
(food and drinking water) exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model--Food Commodity
Intake Database (DEEM-FCIDTM, Version 3.18), which
incorporates 2003-2008 consumption data from the United States
Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). An
unrefined, acute dietary exposure assessment was conducted assuming
tolerance-level residues and assuming 100 percent crop treated (PCT).
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment, EPA used DEEM-FCIDTM, Version 3.18, which
incorporates 2003-2008 consumption data from the USDA's NHANES/WWEIA.
An unrefined chronic dietary risk analysis was conducted assuming
tolerance-level residues and 100 PCT.
iii. Cancer. As explained in unit III.A., quantification of risk
using a non-linear approach (i.e., a cPAD) will adequately account for
all chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity, that could result from
exposure to ethiprole. No separate exposure assessment pertaining to
cancer risk was performed for ethiprole; rather, EPA relied on the
chronic exposure assessment described in this Unit for assessing the
risk of all chronic effects, including cancer.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information.
EPA did not use anticipated residue information in the dietary
assessment for ethiprole. Tolerance-level residues and/or 100% CT were
assumed for all food commodities.
More detailed information on the acute and chronic dietary (food
only) exposure and risk assessment for ethiprole can be found in the
document entitled, ``Ethiprole: Human Health Risk Assessment for a
Proposed Tolerance without U.S. Registration in/on Imported Coffee,
Green Bean,'' dated April 29, 2019, by going to https://www.regulations.gov. The referenced document is available in the docket
established by this action, which is described under ADDRESSES. Locate
and click on the hyperlink for docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0493.
Double-click on the document to view the referenced information.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. Ethiprole and its
degradates were not considered for drinking water assessment because
ethiprole is not registered for use in the U.S.; therefore, exposure to
residues of ethiprole in drinking water is not expected.
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). Ethiprole is not
registered for any specific use patterns that would result in
residential exposure.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/trac6a05.pdf.
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
[[Page 30937]]
substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' EPA has not made
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to ethiprole and any other
substances, and ethiprole does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance
action; therefore, EPA has not assumed that ethiprole has 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 the policy statements
released by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs concerning common
mechanism determinations and procedures for cumulating effects from
substances found to have a common mechanism on EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/.
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 are available to EPA support the choice of a different
safety factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. Although no teratogenic
effects were observed in the existing toxicology database, there is
uncertainty regarding the potential impact of ethiprole on thyroid
hormone homeostasis in the developing organism. Observations
demonstrated that thyroid hormones were affected in several studies
throughout the ethiprole database. Thyroid hormones may play a critical
role in the development of the nervous system.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable hazard and exposure
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 toxicology database for ethiprole is complete for
establishing tolerances without U.S. registration purposes. Previously
the Agency determined that a CTA is required based on the weight-of-
evidence. Subsequently, the registrant submitted a request for a CTA
waiver. Based on a weight-of-evidence approach that considered the
relatively low exposure to the highest exposed populations and the fact
that had the 10x been retained, the exposure levels would still result
in estimated risks below the levels of concern, the Agency concludes
that a CTA in pregnant animals, fetuses, postnatal animals, and adult
animals is not required for ethiprole at this time.
ii. In mammals, no neurotoxic effects were observed during the
subchronic neurotoxicity study in which adverse effects of increased
thyroid and liver weights were observed in males and females,
respectively. The acute neurotoxicity study showed decreased locomotor
activity (both sexes, day 1) and the FOB findings in both sexes on the
day of treatment (4 hours after dosing). The FOB findings included
increased tremors (females), decreased grooming (both sexes), decreased
arousal alert (females), increased number of animals for which no
assessment of gait was possible (females), increased eye closure
(females), increased standing/sitting hunched (females), decreased
activity and rearing counts (females), increased hindlimb and forelimb
grip strength (males), decreased splay (females, day 1), and increased
splay (males, day 8). The similarity in the NOAELs from the acute
neurotoxicity and subchronic neurotoxicity studies are consistent with
the metabolism data that suggesting that ethiprole is not accumulated
in the system. Therefore, a developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) study is
not required for ethiprole.
iii. There is no evidence that ethiprole 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
database for ethiprole. The dietary assessment is based on high end
assumptions, assuming tolerance-level residues and 100 PCT. The
assessment will not underestimate the exposure and risk posed by
ethiprole.
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). Since there are no registered
or proposed uses of ethiprole that result in residential exposure, the
acute and chronic aggregate exposure and risk assessments are equal to
the acute and chronic dietary exposure and risk estimates (food only),
respectively. 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. Using the exposure assumptions described in this Unit
for dietary and non-dietary acute exposures, EPA has concluded that
acute dietary exposure to ethiprole from food only will utilize <1% of
the aPAD for the general U.S. population. The most highly-exposed
population subgroup, all infants (<1 year old), utilized 2.1% of the
aPAD.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
Unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic dietary
exposure to ethiprole from food only will utilize 2.0% of the cPAD for
the general U.S. population. The most highly-exposed population
subgroup, all infants (<1 year old), utilized 5.7% of the cPAD. Based
on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding residential use
patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of ethiprole is not
expected.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). A short-term
adverse effect was identified; however, ethiprole is not registered for
any use patterns that would result in short-term residential exposure.
Short-term risk is assessed based on short-term residential exposure
plus chronic dietary exposure. Because there is no short-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-term risk), no further
assessment of short-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating short-term risk for
ethiprole.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
ethiprole is not registered for any use patterns that would result in
intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
[[Page 30938]]
dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for
ethiprole.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. As discussed in Unit
III.A., EPA concluded that the nonlinear approach for assessing
potential cancer risk from exposure to ethiprole is appropriate. As
noted in this Unit, the chronic risk aggregate exposure to ethiprole is
below the Agency's level of concern; therefore, the Agency concludes
that there is not a cancer risk of concern from exposure to ethiprole.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general U.S. population, or to infants and children from
aggregate exposure to ethiprole residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
The HPLC/MS-MS enforcement method, Method 01128, is acceptable for
determination of residues of ethiprole and its sulfone metabolite RPA
097973 for data collection in plant commodities. The GC-ECD method
(Report No. B003572) is suitable for determining residues of parent
ethiprole and RPA in milk, eggs and tissues. The FDA multiresidue
method testing study for ethiprole is adequate and indicates that PAM
multiresidue methods are not suitable for enforcing tolerances for
residues of ethiprole.
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. Codex has not
established maximum residue limits (MRLs) for residues of ethiprole in
coffee commodities; therefore, there are no harmonization issues at
this time.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established for residues of the
insecticide ethiprole, 5-amino-1-[2,6-dichloro-4-
(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4-(ethylsulfinyl)-1H-pyrazole-3-carbonitrile,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on coffee, green bean
at 0.1 ppm. EPA is also amending the footnote in the table in paragraph
(a) to accommodate the coffee commodity.
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 it considered a
regulatory action under Executive Order 13771, entitled ``Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs'' (82 FR 9339), February
3, 2017). This action does not contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance 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: June 19, 2019.
Michael Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
[[Page 30939]]
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. 180.652, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 180.652 Ethiprole; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of ethiprole,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities in
the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified below
is to be determined by measuring only ethiprole, 5-amino-1-[2,6-
dichloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-4-(ethylsulfinyl)-1H-pyrazole-3-
carbonitrile.
Table 1 to Paragraph (a)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coffee, green bean \1\...................................... 0.1
Rice, grain \1\............................................. 1.7
Tea, dried \1\.............................................. 30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no U.S. registrations for this commodity as of June 28,
2019.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-13546 Filed 6-27-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P