Broflanilide; Pesticide Tolerances, 81799-81805 [2020-27906]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Issued: December 14, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; main
telephone number: (703) 305–7090;
email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2020–27797 Filed 12–16–20; 8:45 am]
I. General Information
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
A. Does this action apply to me?
the regulatory change effective in the
CFR.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2018–0053; FRL–10016–42]
Broflanilide; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of broflanilide in
or on multiple commodities that 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
December 17, 2020. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 16, 2021, 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–2018–0053, 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.
Due to the public health concerns
related to COVID–19, the EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is
closed to visitors with limited
exceptions. The staff continues to
provide remote customer service via
email, phone, and webform. For the
latest status information on EPA/DC
services and docket access, visit https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marietta Echeverria, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:27 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
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
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2018–0053 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing and must be received
by the Hearing Clerk on or before
February 16, 2021. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
81799
objection or hearing request, identified
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2018–0053, 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 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 7F8646) by BASF
Corporation, 26 Davis Dr., P.O. Box
13528, Research Triangle Park, NC
27709. The petition requested to
establish tolerances in 40 CFR part 180
for residues of the insecticide,
broflanilide, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on grain, cereal,
except rice, group 15; amaranth grain;
quinoa, grain; spelt, grain; canihua,
grain; chia, grain; cram-cram, grain;
huauzontle, grain; teff, grain; and corn,
sweet, kernel plus cob with husks
removed at 0.01 parts per million (ppm);
and vegetables, tuberous and corm,
subgroup 1C at 0.04 ppm. Tolerances
were also requested for cattle, meat;
goat, meat; horse, meat; sheep, meat at
0.01 ppm; milk, fat and poultry, fat at
0.02 ppm; and cattle, fat; sheep, fat; and
goat, fat at 0.05 ppm. Additionally,
tolerances were requested for grain,
cereal, forage, fodder and straw, group
16, except rice; quinoa, hay; teff, hay;
and corn, sweet, stover; corn, sweet,
forage at 0.01 ppm; corn, field, milled
products at 0.015 ppm; and potato, wet
peel at 0.1 ppm. In addition, BASF
proposed to establish a tolerance of 0.01
ppm for residues of broflanilide in or on
all food items in food handling
establishments where food and food
products are held, processed, prepared
and/or served. That document
referenced a summary of the petition
prepared by BASF, the registrant, which
E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM
17DER1
81800
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
is available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. A comment was
received on the notice of filing. EPA’s
response to this comment is discussed
in Unit IV.C.
In the Federal Register of June 24,
2020 (85 FR 37806) (FRL–10010–82),
EPA issued a second notice amending
the previous NOF published in the
Federal Register on July 24, 2018, by
announcing additional commodities for
which the petitioner was seeking
tolerances. BASF requested to establish
a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for
residues of the insecticide, broflanilide,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on amaranth, stover;
quinoa, forage; quinoa, straw; teff,
forage; and teff, straw at 0.01 ppm.
(EPA’s notice inadvertently listed
amaranth, grain, which had already
been identified in the July 2018 notice,
instead of amaranth, stover, but BASF’s
petition included a request for
amaranth, stover.) BASF also requested
tolerances for food items (animal origin)
for hog, meat; poultry, meat; eggs; cattle,
meat byproducts; goat, meat byproducts;
hog, meat byproducts; horse, meat
byproducts; poultry, meat byproducts;
sheep, meat byproducts; hog, fat; and
horse, fat at 0.02 ppm. No comments
were received in response to this notice.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing some tolerances at different
levels than were petitioned for. The
reason for these changes 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:27 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
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 broflanilide
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with broflanilide 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 target organs of broflanilide
toxicity are the adrenal glands (rats,
mice, and dogs) and ovaries (rats and
mice). Adrenal effects include increased
adrenal weights, increased incidence of
adrenal cortex vacuolation, and adrenal
cortex hypertrophy in both sexes.
Ovarian effects include increased
incidence of ovarian interstitial gland
vacuolation.
There were no parental or
developmental effects reported up to the
limit dose tested (1000 mg/kg/day) in
the developmental studies in rats and
rabbits. In the reproduction study in
rats, increased adrenal weights with
corroborative histopathological findings
(increased vacuolation and diffuse
hypertrophy in the adrenal gland cortex)
were observed in parental rats of both
sexes and generations. Offspring
showed decreased pup weights in F1
and F2 pups, which occurred at a higher
dose level than the observed adverse
effects in parental rats. Reproductive
parameters showed increased ovarian
weights and increased incidence of
vacuolation of interstitial gland in the
ovary at a higher dose level than the
adverse effects in parental rats. There
were no effects on fertility or other
measured reproductive parameters.
There is no evidence of neurotoxicity
in acute or subchronic neurotoxicity
studies and broflanilide is not an
immunotoxic chemical. In the
subchronic inhalation study, there was
an increase in absolute and relative
adrenal weight and increased incidence
of adrenal vacuolation in both sexes and
increased incidence of ovarian
vacuolation.
In the chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity
study in rats, there were treatmentrelated increases in Leydig cell
adenomas in male rats, and in luteomas
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and granulosa cell tumors in the ovaries,
as well as in uterine adenocarcinomas,
and adrenal cortex carcinomas in female
rats. No treatment-related increase in
tumor incidences was observed in mice.
All mutagenicity studies were negative
for both the parent and major
metabolites (DM–8007, S(PFP–OH)8007, DC–8007, DC–DM–8007, MFBA,
AB-oxa, S9Br-OH)-8007).
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by broflanilide 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 the document
titled ‘‘Broflanilide: New Active
Ingredient Human Health Risk
Assessment’’ (hereinafter ‘‘Broflanilide
Human Health Risk Assessment’’) on
pages 42–58 in docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPP–2018–0053.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide’s toxicological
profile is determined, EPA identifies
toxicological points of departure (POD)
and levels of concern to use in
evaluating the risk posed by human
exposure to the pesticide. For hazards
that have a threshold below which there
is no appreciable risk, the toxicological
POD is used as the basis for derivation
of reference values for risk assessment.
PODs are developed based on a careful
analysis of the doses in each
toxicological study to determine the
dose at which no adverse effects are
observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/assessinghuman-health-risk-pesticide.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for broflanilide used for
human risk assessment can be found in
the Broflanilide Human Health Risk
Assessment.
E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM
17DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to broflanilide, EPA
considered exposure under the
petitioned-for tolerances. EPA assessed
dietary exposures from broflanilide 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 broflanilide;
therefore, a quantitative acute dietary
exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the 2003–2008 food
consumption data from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s National
Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey, What We Eat in America
(NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels
in food, for all commodities in the
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
software with the Food Commodity
Intake Database (DEEM–FCID), EPA
used tolerance-level residues, highest
average field trials (HAFT) residue
values, anticipated residues, 100
percent crop treated (PCT), and default
processing factors resulting from
agricultural uses, and the food handling
establishment (FHE) values (1⁄2 FHE
LOQ tolerance and 4.65% FHE
treatment).
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that broflanilide should be
classified as ‘‘Likely to be Carcinogenic
to Humans’’ and a linear approach has
been used to quantify cancer risk. The
cancer risk assessment used the same
assumptions as the chronic assessment.
iv. Anticipated residue and 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:27 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
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 chronic and cancer assessments
assumed 100 PCT for agricultural uses
and the treatment value of 4.65% for
FHE uses.
EPA estimates the percent of
commodities treated in Food Handling
Establishments (FHE) for new uses of
active ingredients based on the best
available information. This includes
survey information on pesticide usage
related to the number of facilities being
treated, product forms used (e.g., liquids
and aerosols), and treatment schedule
by FHE segments (e.g., warehouse, food
processor, distributor, and restaurant).
EPA also incorporated the best available
information related to the transfer of
commodities between various segments
of food handling establishments and the
percent of food consumed by location,
either in the home or outside the home.
All information currently available
has been considered and EPA has
concluded that for any active ingredient,
including broflanilide, there is at most
a 4.65% likelihood that a food
commodity could contain potential
residues resulting from one or more
treatments while in the food handling
establishment channel of trade. Similar
to estimates of agricultural use, this
estimate should be reconsidered in 5
years.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
81801
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 broflanilide 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 broflanilide alone as well as for the
combined residues of concern (ROC),
broflanilide and DC–8007 in drinking
water. These simulation models take
into account data on the physical,
chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of broflanilide and the
ROC, broflanilide and DC–8007. Further
information regarding EPA drinking
water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at
https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-scienceand-assessing-pesticide-risks/aboutwater-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
Based on the Pesticide in Water
Calculator (PWC) model and using the
Total Residue (TR) method for the
ROCs, the estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) of broflanilide
and DC–8007 for chronic exposures for
non-cancer assessments are estimated to
be 0.9 ppb for surface water and for
chronic exposures for cancer
assessments are estimated to be 0.7 ppb
for surface water. Since breakthrough of
broflanilide into groundwater is
incomplete after 100 years of
simulation, post-breakthrough EDWCs
are negligible. Due to the high
Freundlich adsorption coefficient (KF)
of broflanilide, peak EDWCs in
groundwater were negligible as well.
Modeled estimates of drinking water
concentrations were directly entered
into the dietary exposure model. For the
chronic dietary risk assessment, the
water concentration value of 0.9 ppb
was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water. For the cancer dietary
risk assessment, the water concentration
value of 0.7 ppb was used to assess the
contribution to drinking water.
E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM
17DER1
81802
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
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).
There are several proposed residential
uses for broflanilide. These uses
include, but are not limited to,
insecticide treatments in and around
homes, apartments, schools, picnic
areas, hospitals, and nursing homes. In
addition, there are several proposed
termiticide products that may be used
around the exterior of homes,
apartments, schools, and other
residential use sites. EPA assessed
residential exposure using the following
assumptions:
• Residential handler: Although there
is one proposed broflanilide product
label with residential use sites (e.g.,
homes, apartments, mobile homes), this
product is formulated as a ready-to-use
pressurized can, which, once dispensed,
rapidly expands to generate a dry foam.
One ounce (weight) of the product is
being dispensed in approximately 5
seconds, and the ready-to-use
pressurized can produces about 1 quart
of foam. Based on the areas to which it
is applied (i.e., with actuators in voids,
cracks, and other places where insects
harbor), dermal exposure is expected to
be negligible. In addition, considering
the low vapor pressure of broflanilide
(6.7×10¥11 mmHg) and formulation into
foam, inhalation exposure is also
expected to be negligible. Therefore,
neither a quantitative non-cancer nor
cancer residential handler exposure and
risk assessment was conducted.
• Post-application exposure: There is
the potential for short-term postapplication exposure for individuals
exposed as a result of being in an
environment that has been previously
treated with broflanilide. Due to a lack
of dermal hazard for broflanilide, a
dermal non-cancer assessment was not
conducted. The quantitative non-cancer
exposure and risk assessment for
residential short-term post-application
exposures is based on the following
maximum application rate scenarios:
Inhalation and incidental oral exposure
from indoor crack and crevice, banded,
and spot applications.
The PODs for the oral and inhalation
routes are based on the same effects:
Therefore, oral and inhalation routes
can be combined. Since the LOCs for
both incidental oral and inhalation are
different (100 and 30), the aggregate risk
index (ARI) approach was used:
Aggregate Risk Index (ARI) = 1 ÷
[(Incidental Oral LOC ÷ Incidental
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:27 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
Oral MOE) + (Inhalation LOC ÷
Inhalation MOE)].
Although a non-cancer dermal risk
assessment was not performed due to
the lack of an adverse effect in the noncancer dermal study, a dermal cancer
exposure and risk assessment was
performed because dermal exposure
does contribute to the overall cancer
risk for broflanilide.
Post-application cancer risk estimates
for adults were calculated using a linear
low-dose extrapolation approach in
which a Lifetime Average Daily Dose
(LADD) is first calculated and then
compared with a Q1 * that has been
calculated for broflanilide based on dose
response data in the appropriate
toxicology study (Q1* = 2.48 × 10¥3
(mg/kg/day)¥1).
The residential exposure scenario
used in the adult non-cancer aggregate
assessment is short-term postapplication inhalation exposure
following an indoor surface directed
spot application. The residential
exposure scenario used in the noncancer aggregate assessment of children
1 to less than 2 years old is the
combined inhalation and hand-tomouth exposures from short-term postapplication exposure to indoor
perimeter/spot coarse and pin stream
surface spray applications on carpet.
The residential exposure scenario
used in the adult cancer aggregate
assessment is post-application dermal
and inhalation exposure following an
indoor surface directed perimeter/spot
application.
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticidescience-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/
standard-operating-proceduresresidential-pesticide.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found broflanilide to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
broflanilide does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that broflanilide does not have
a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s website at https://
www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/cumulativeassessment-risk-pesticides.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
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.
Broflanilide did not demonstrate any
evidence of increased qualitative or
quantitative susceptibility in the rat and
rabbit developmental toxicity studies or
the 2-generation rat reproduction study.
In the rabbit and rat developmental
toxicity studies, there were no
developmental effects up to the limit
dose tested (1000 mg/kg/day). In the
reproduction study in rats, decreased
pup weights in F1 and F2 pups occurred
at a higher dose levels than the dose
with adverse parental findings.
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
broflanilide is complete.
ii. Acute and subchronic
neurotoxicity studies showed no
evidence of neurotoxicity in male or
female rats. There was no other
evidence in any species tested to
indicate neurotoxicity potential.
Therefore, there is no concern for acute
or subchronic neurotoxicity resulting
from exposure to broflanilide.
iii. There is no evidence that
broflanilide 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.
The dietary food exposure assessments
E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM
17DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
were performed based on 100 PCT for
agricultural uses, a treatment value of
4.65% for FHE uses, and some
anticipated residue data. EPA made
conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling
used to assess exposure to broflanilide
in drinking water. EPA used similarly
conservative assumptions to assess postapplication exposure of children as well
as incidental oral exposure of toddlers.
These assessments will not
underestimate the exposure and risks
posed by broflanilide.
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, broflanilide 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 broflanilide
from food and water will utilize less
than 1% of the cPAD for children 1 to
2 years old, the population group
receiving the greatest exposure. Based
on the explanation in Unit III.C.3.,
regarding residential use patterns,
chronic residential exposure to residues
of broflanilide 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).
Broflanilide is proposed for uses that
could result in short-term residential
exposure, and the Agency has
determined that it is appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with short-term residential
exposures to broflanilide.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined short-term food, water, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:27 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
residential exposures result in aggregate
ARIs of 320 for adults and 4.4 for
children 1 to <2 years old. Because
EPA’s level of concern for broflanilide is
an ARI of 1 or below, these ARIs are not
of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect
was identified; however, broflanilide is
not registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Intermediate-term
risk is assessed based on intermediateterm residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no
intermediate-term residential exposure
and chronic dietary exposure has
already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for
broflanilide.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. A cancer aggregate risk
assessment was completed for the
proposed residential and dietary uses of
broflanilide using the linear slope factor
(Q1 *) of 2.48 × 10¥3. The assessment
incorporates the adult post-application
dermal and inhalation exposure
following an indoor surface directed
perimeter/spot application. The
residential assessment is a conservative
calculation which assumes 12
retreatments a year as allowed by the
label at the maximum rate proposed,
365 days of exposure in the residential
setting, and 10% dissipation of residues
per day. The cancer dietary exposure
estimate for adults 20–49 years old, the
most highly-exposed adult population
subgroup, assumed 100% crop treated
for agricultural uses and the FHE
treatment value of 4.65% for FHE uses.
The resulting aggregate cancer risk
estimate is 1 × 10¥6.
EPA generally considers cancer risks
(expressed as the probability of an
increased cancer case) in the range of 1
in 1 million (or 1 × 10¥6) or less to be
negligible. Accordingly, EPA has
concluded the aggregate cancer risk for
all broflanilide uses fall within the
range of 1 × 10¥6 and are thus
negligible.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
81803
from aggregate exposure to broflanilide
residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
The petitioner proposed a multiresidue method, BASF method D1417/
01, based on QuEChERS (quick, easy,
cheap, effective, rugged, safe) for the
determination of broflanilide residues in
plant matrices. This method has been
proven to be suitable for the
determination of residues of broflanilide
in plant matrices.
BASF method D1604/01 is proposed
as the enforcement method for the
determination of residues of broflanilide
and DM–8007 in livestock commodities
by LC–MS/MS. This method has been
proven to be suitable for the
determination of residues of broflanilide
and DM–8007 in livestock matrices.
The methods may be requested from:
Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;
telephone number: (410) 305–2905;
email address: residuemethods@
epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
Broflanilide is a new active ingredient
and no MRLs have yet been established
by Codex.
C. Response to Comments
One comment was received in
response to the Notice of Filing. The
comment stated in part that ‘‘the notice
of the application for these uses does
not contain any information about
human toxicity, water solubility,
granular transmissibility, or other
information which could help evaluate
the risk of higher levels of use of
E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM
17DER1
81804
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
broflanilide’’ and that ‘‘perhaps EPA
should reissue the notice with attached
information on toxicity and
transmission levels.’’ A supporting
document summarizing the information
on the residue chemistry, toxicological
profile, as well as an estimate of the
aggregate exposure expected was
available in the docket at the time the
notice was published. The NOF
published on July 24, 2018, referred to
the docket and noted that the summary
was available. That document provided
information to help evaluate the risks of
broflanilide.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
EPA is establishing the tolerance in/
on potato, wet peel at 0.08 ppm rather
than the petitioned-for tolerance of 0.1
ppm. The Agency’s practice is to use the
HAFT value from the field trials and the
median processing factor. Based on
these data, the appropriate tolerance for
potato, wet peel is 0.08 ppm.
EPA is not establishing a separate
tolerance for corn, sweet, kernel plus
cob with husks removed because it is
covered under grain, cereal, group 15,
except rice. Similarly, separate
tolerances for corn, sweet, stover; and
corn, sweet forage are not being
established because they are covered
under grain, cereal, forage, fodder, and
straw, group 16, except rice.
EPA is including the livestock
metabolite DM–8007 as a residue of
concern for tolerance enforcement and
risk assessment. Therefore, the tolerance
expression for livestock commodities is
being revised to include the metabolite
DM–8007.
EPA is establishing a tolerance for
residues in milk at 0.02 ppm to
harmonize with Canadian livestock
LOQ MRLs. The tolerance of 0.02 ppm
for residues in milk is higher than the
anticipated residues in milk fat;
therefore, although the available data
support a tolerance for residues in milk
fat at 0.01 ppm, a separate milk fat
tolerance is not necessary at this time.
Lastly, the commodity definitions for
the FHE use, egg and crop group 16 are
being modified to be consistent with
Agency nomenclature.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of broflanilide, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the
following plant commodities:
Amaranth, grain, grain at 0.01 ppm;
Amaranth, grain, stover at 0.01 ppm;
Can˜ihua, grain at 0.01 ppm; Chia, grain
at 0.01 ppm; Corn, field, milled
byproducts at 0.015 ppm; Cram-cram,
grain at 0.01 ppm; Grain, cereal, group
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:27 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
15, except rice at 0.01 ppm; Food and
feed commodities (other than those
covered by a higher tolerance) at 0.01
ppm; Grain, cereal, forage, fodder, and
straw, group 16, except rice at 0.01 ppm;
Huauzontle, grain at 0.01 ppm; Potato,
wet peel at 0.08 ppm; Quinoa, forage at
0.01 ppm; Quinoa, grain at 0.01 ppm;
Quinoa, hay at 0.01 ppm; Quinoa, straw
at 0.01 ppm; Spelt, grain at 0.01 ppm;
Teff, forage at 0.01 ppm; Teff, grain at
0.01 ppm; Teff, hay at 0.01 ppm; Teff,
straw at 0.01 ppm; and Vegetable,
tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.04
ppm.
Tolerances are also established for
residues of broflanilide, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the
following livestock commodities: Cattle,
fat at 0.02 ppm; Cattle, meat at 0.02
ppm; Cattle, meat byproducts at 0.02
ppm; Egg at 0.02 ppm; Goat, fat at 0.02
ppm; Goat, meat at 0.02 ppm; Goat,
meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm; Hog, fat
at 0.02 ppm; Hog, meat at 0.02 ppm;
Hog, meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm;
Horse, fat at 0.02 ppm; Horse, meat at
0.02 ppm; Horse, meat byproducts at
0.02 ppm; Milk at 0.02 ppm; Poultry, fat
at 0.02 ppm; Poultry, meat at 0.02 ppm;
Poultry, meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm;
Sheep, fat at 0.02 ppm; Sheep, meat at
0.02 ppm; and Sheep, meat byproducts
at 0.02 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes tolerances
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this action is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), nor is it considered a
regulatory action under Executive Order
13771, entitled ‘‘Reducing Regulations
and Controlling Regulatory Costs’’ (82
FR 9339, February 3, 2017). This action
does not contain any information
collections subject to OMB approval
under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does
it require any special considerations
under Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerances in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers,
food processors, food handlers, and food
retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does
this action alter the relationships or
distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress
in the preemption provisions of FFDCA
section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency
has determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on States
or Tribal Governments, on the
relationship between the National
Government and the States or Tribal
Governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132,
entitled ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999) and Executive Order
13175, entitled ‘‘Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments’’ (65 FR 67249, November
9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In
addition, this action does not impose
any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.).
This action does not involve any
technical standards that would require
Agency consideration of voluntary
consensus standards pursuant to section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM
17DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: November 30, 2020.
Edward Messina,
Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the
preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR
chapter I as follows:
PART 180—TOLERANCES AND
EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE
CHEMICAL RESIDUES IN FOOD
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
specified in Table 2 is to be determined
by measuring the sum of broflanilide, 3(benzoylmethylamino)-N-[2-bromo-4[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-1(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-6(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-2fluorobenzamide, and its metabolite 3benzamido-N-[2-bromo-4(perfluoropropan-2-yl)-6(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-2fluorobenzamide, calculated as the
stoichiometric equivalent of
broflanilide, in or on the commodity.
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (A)(2)
2. Add § 180.714 to subpart C to read
as follows:
■
§ 180.714 Broflanilide; tolerances for
residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are
established for residues of broflanilide,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities to
Table 1 of this section. Compliance with
the tolerance levels specified in Table 1
is to be determined by measuring only
broflanilide, 3-(benzoylmethylamino)-N[2-bromo-4-[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-1(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-6(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-2fluorobenzamide, in or on the
commodity.
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(1)
Parts per
million
Commodity
Amaranth, grain, grain ................
Amaranth, grain, stover ..............
Can˜ihua, grain ............................
Chia, grain ..................................
Corn, field, milled byproducts .....
Cram-cram, grain ........................
Grain, cereal, group 15, except
rice ..........................................
Food and feed commodities
(other than those covered by a
higher tolerance) .....................
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder,
and straw, group 16, except
rice ..........................................
Huauzontle, grain .......................
Potato, wet peel ..........................
Quinoa, forage ............................
Quinoa, grain ..............................
Quinoa, hay ................................
Quinoa, straw .............................
Spelt, grain .................................
Teff, forage .................................
Teff, grain ...................................
Teff, hay ......................................
Teff, straw ...................................
Vegetable, tuberous and corm,
subgroup 1C ...........................
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.015
0.01
0.01
17:27 Dec 16, 2020
Jkt 253001
Cattle, fat ....................................
Cattle, meat ................................
Cattle, meat byproducts .............
Egg .............................................
Goat, fat ......................................
Goat, meat ..................................
Goat, meat byproducts ...............
Hog, fat .......................................
Hog, meat ...................................
Hog, meat byproducts ................
Horse, fat ....................................
Horse, meat ................................
Horse, meat byproducts .............
Milk .............................................
Poultry, fat ..................................
Poultry, meat ..............................
Poultry, meat byproducts ............
Sheep, fat ...................................
Sheep, meat ...............................
Sheep, meat byproducts ............
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
(b)–(d) [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2020–27906 Filed 12–16–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 76
0.01
[MB Docket Nos. 20–70, 17–105, 11–131;
FCC 20–162; FRS 17261]
0.01
0.01
0.08
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
Review Procedures; Modernization of
Media Regulation Initiative; Program
Carriage Rules
0.04
(2) Tolerances are established for
residues of broflanilide, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities to Table 2 of this section.
Compliance with the tolerance levels
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Parts per
million
Commodity
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Commission revises the rules governing
the resolution of program carriage
disputes between video programming
vendors and multichannel video
programming distributors (MVPDs) and
parallel procedural rules, which govern
program access, open video system
(OVS), and good-faith retransmission
consent complaints. Specifically, the
document amends the third prong of the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
81805
statute of limitations for filing program
carriage complaints so that it no longer
undermines the fundamental purpose of
a statute of limitations. To harmonize
the rules, the document similarly
amends the statutes of limitations for
filing program access, OVS, and goodfaith retransmission consent complaints.
The document also revises the effective
date and review procedures for initial
decisions issued by an administrative
law judge (ALJ) in program carriage,
program access, and OVS proceedings to
make them consistent with the
Commission’s generally applicable
procedures and adopts an aspirational
shot clock to encourage quick resolution
of appeals of such decisions. The
Commission concludes that these
changes will help to ensure a clear and
expeditious program access, program
carriage, retransmission consent, and
OVS complaint process for potential
complainants and defendants.
DATES: Effective January 19, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
additional information on this
proceeding, contact John Cobb,
John.Cobb@fcc.gov, of the Policy
Division, Media Bureau, (202) 418–
2120.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Report
and Order, MB Docket Nos. 20–70, 17–
105, 11–131; FCC 20–162, adopted and
released on November 18, 2020. The full
text of this document is available via
ECFS (https://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/).
(Documents will be available
electronically in ASCII, Word, and/or
Adobe Acrobat.) To request these
documents in accessible formats
(computer diskettes, large print, audio
recording, and Braille), send an email to
fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Commission’s
Consumer and Governmental Affairs
Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice), (202)
418–0432 (TTY).
Synopsis
In this Report and Order (Order), we
adopt proposed changes to the rules
governing the resolution of program
carriage disputes between video
programming vendors and multichannel
video programming distributors
(MVPDs) and parallel procedural rules
in part 76 of our rules, which govern
program access, open video system
(OVS), and good-faith retransmission
consent complaints. Specifically, we
amend the third prong of the statute of
limitations for filing program carriage
complaints so that it no longer
undermines the fundamental purpose of
a statute of limitations. To harmonize
our rules, we similarly amend the
statutes of limitations for filing program
E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM
17DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 243 (Thursday, December 17, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81799-81805]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27906]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0053; FRL-10016-42]
Broflanilide; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
broflanilide in or on multiple commodities that 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 December 17, 2020. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 16, 2021,
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-2018-0053, 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.
Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is closed to visitors with
limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status
information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marietta Echeverria, 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.
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-2018-0053 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
February 16, 2021. 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-2018-0053, 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 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
7F8646) by BASF Corporation, 26 Davis Dr., P.O. Box 13528, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition requested to establish tolerances
in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of the insecticide, broflanilide,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on grain, cereal,
except rice, group 15; amaranth grain; quinoa, grain; spelt, grain;
canihua, grain; chia, grain; cram-cram, grain; huauzontle, grain; teff,
grain; and corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husks removed at 0.01
parts per million (ppm); and vegetables, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C
at 0.04 ppm. Tolerances were also requested for cattle, meat; goat,
meat; horse, meat; sheep, meat at 0.01 ppm; milk, fat and poultry, fat
at 0.02 ppm; and cattle, fat; sheep, fat; and goat, fat at 0.05 ppm.
Additionally, tolerances were requested for grain, cereal, forage,
fodder and straw, group 16, except rice; quinoa, hay; teff, hay; and
corn, sweet, stover; corn, sweet, forage at 0.01 ppm; corn, field,
milled products at 0.015 ppm; and potato, wet peel at 0.1 ppm. In
addition, BASF proposed to establish a tolerance of 0.01 ppm for
residues of broflanilide in or on all food items in food handling
establishments where food and food products are held, processed,
prepared and/or served. That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by BASF, the registrant, which
[[Page 81800]]
is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. A comment was
received on the notice of filing. EPA's response to this comment is
discussed in Unit IV.C.
In the Federal Register of June 24, 2020 (85 FR 37806) (FRL-10010-
82), EPA issued a second notice amending the previous NOF published in
the Federal Register on July 24, 2018, by announcing additional
commodities for which the petitioner was seeking tolerances. BASF
requested to establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of
the insecticide, broflanilide, including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on amaranth, stover; quinoa, forage; quinoa, straw;
teff, forage; and teff, straw at 0.01 ppm. (EPA's notice inadvertently
listed amaranth, grain, which had already been identified in the July
2018 notice, instead of amaranth, stover, but BASF's petition included
a request for amaranth, stover.) BASF also requested tolerances for
food items (animal origin) for hog, meat; poultry, meat; eggs; cattle,
meat byproducts; goat, meat byproducts; hog, meat byproducts; horse,
meat byproducts; poultry, meat byproducts; sheep, meat byproducts; hog,
fat; and horse, fat at 0.02 ppm. No comments were received in response
to this notice.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is
establishing some tolerances at different levels than were petitioned
for. The reason for these changes 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 broflanilide including exposure
resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with broflanilide 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 target organs of broflanilide toxicity are the adrenal glands
(rats, mice, and dogs) and ovaries (rats and mice). Adrenal effects
include increased adrenal weights, increased incidence of adrenal
cortex vacuolation, and adrenal cortex hypertrophy in both sexes.
Ovarian effects include increased incidence of ovarian interstitial
gland vacuolation.
There were no parental or developmental effects reported up to the
limit dose tested (1000 mg/kg/day) in the developmental studies in rats
and rabbits. In the reproduction study in rats, increased adrenal
weights with corroborative histopathological findings (increased
vacuolation and diffuse hypertrophy in the adrenal gland cortex) were
observed in parental rats of both sexes and generations. Offspring
showed decreased pup weights in F1 and F2 pups, which occurred at a
higher dose level than the observed adverse effects in parental rats.
Reproductive parameters showed increased ovarian weights and increased
incidence of vacuolation of interstitial gland in the ovary at a higher
dose level than the adverse effects in parental rats. There were no
effects on fertility or other measured reproductive parameters.
There is no evidence of neurotoxicity in acute or subchronic
neurotoxicity studies and broflanilide is not an immunotoxic chemical.
In the subchronic inhalation study, there was an increase in absolute
and relative adrenal weight and increased incidence of adrenal
vacuolation in both sexes and increased incidence of ovarian
vacuolation.
In the chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study in rats, there were
treatment-related increases in Leydig cell adenomas in male rats, and
in luteomas and granulosa cell tumors in the ovaries, as well as in
uterine adenocarcinomas, and adrenal cortex carcinomas in female rats.
No treatment-related increase in tumor incidences was observed in mice.
All mutagenicity studies were negative for both the parent and major
metabolites (DM-8007, S(PFP-OH)-8007, DC-8007, DC-DM-8007, MFBA, AB-
oxa, S9Br-OH)-8007).
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by broflanilide as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in the document titled ``Broflanilide: New Active
Ingredient Human Health Risk Assessment'' (hereinafter ``Broflanilide
Human Health Risk Assessment'') on pages 42-58 in docket ID number EPA-
HQ-OPP-2018-0053.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticide.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for broflanilide used for
human risk assessment can be found in the Broflanilide Human Health
Risk Assessment.
[[Page 81801]]
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to broflanilide, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-
for tolerances. EPA assessed dietary exposures from broflanilide 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
broflanilide; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the 2003-2008 food consumption data from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture's National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in
food, for all commodities in the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
software with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID), EPA used
tolerance-level residues, highest average field trials (HAFT) residue
values, anticipated residues, 100 percent crop treated (PCT), and
default processing factors resulting from agricultural uses, and the
food handling establishment (FHE) values (\1/2\ FHE LOQ tolerance and
4.65% FHE treatment).
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has
concluded that broflanilide should be classified as ``Likely to be
Carcinogenic to Humans'' and a linear approach has been used to
quantify cancer risk. The cancer risk assessment used the same
assumptions as the chronic assessment.
iv. Anticipated residue and 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 chronic and cancer assessments assumed 100 PCT for agricultural
uses and the treatment value of 4.65% for FHE uses.
EPA estimates the percent of commodities treated in Food Handling
Establishments (FHE) for new uses of active ingredients based on the
best available information. This includes survey information on
pesticide usage related to the number of facilities being treated,
product forms used (e.g., liquids and aerosols), and treatment schedule
by FHE segments (e.g., warehouse, food processor, distributor, and
restaurant). EPA also incorporated the best available information
related to the transfer of commodities between various segments of food
handling establishments and the percent of food consumed by location,
either in the home or outside the home.
All information currently available has been considered and EPA has
concluded that for any active ingredient, including broflanilide, there
is at most a 4.65% likelihood that a food commodity could contain
potential residues resulting from one or more treatments while in the
food handling establishment channel of trade. Similar to estimates of
agricultural use, this estimate should be reconsidered in 5 years.
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 broflanilide 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 broflanilide alone as well as for the combined residues
of concern (ROC), broflanilide and DC-8007 in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and
fate/transport characteristics of broflanilide and the ROC,
broflanilide and DC-8007. Further information regarding EPA drinking
water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be found at
https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
Based on the Pesticide in Water Calculator (PWC) model and using
the Total Residue (TR) method for the ROCs, the estimated drinking
water concentrations (EDWCs) of broflanilide and DC-8007 for chronic
exposures for non-cancer assessments are estimated to be 0.9 ppb for
surface water and for chronic exposures for cancer assessments are
estimated to be 0.7 ppb for surface water. Since breakthrough of
broflanilide into groundwater is incomplete after 100 years of
simulation, post-breakthrough EDWCs are negligible. Due to the high
Freundlich adsorption coefficient (KF) of broflanilide, peak
EDWCs in groundwater were negligible as well.
Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly
entered into the dietary exposure model. For the chronic dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 0.9 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water. For the cancer dietary risk
assessment, the water concentration value of 0.7 ppb was used to assess
the contribution to drinking water.
[[Page 81802]]
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).
There are several proposed residential uses for broflanilide. These
uses include, but are not limited to, insecticide treatments in and
around homes, apartments, schools, picnic areas, hospitals, and nursing
homes. In addition, there are several proposed termiticide products
that may be used around the exterior of homes, apartments, schools, and
other residential use sites. EPA assessed residential exposure using
the following assumptions:
Residential handler: Although there is one proposed
broflanilide product label with residential use sites (e.g., homes,
apartments, mobile homes), this product is formulated as a ready-to-use
pressurized can, which, once dispensed, rapidly expands to generate a
dry foam. One ounce (weight) of the product is being dispensed in
approximately 5 seconds, and the ready-to-use pressurized can produces
about 1 quart of foam. Based on the areas to which it is applied (i.e.,
with actuators in voids, cracks, and other places where insects
harbor), dermal exposure is expected to be negligible. In addition,
considering the low vapor pressure of broflanilide
(6.7x10-11 mmHg) and formulation into foam, inhalation
exposure is also expected to be negligible. Therefore, neither a
quantitative non-cancer nor cancer residential handler exposure and
risk assessment was conducted.
Post-application exposure: There is the potential for
short-term post-application exposure for individuals exposed as a
result of being in an environment that has been previously treated with
broflanilide. Due to a lack of dermal hazard for broflanilide, a dermal
non-cancer assessment was not conducted. The quantitative non-cancer
exposure and risk assessment for residential short-term post-
application exposures is based on the following maximum application
rate scenarios: Inhalation and incidental oral exposure from indoor
crack and crevice, banded, and spot applications.
The PODs for the oral and inhalation routes are based on the same
effects: Therefore, oral and inhalation routes can be combined. Since
the LOCs for both incidental oral and inhalation are different (100 and
30), the aggregate risk index (ARI) approach was used:
Aggregate Risk Index (ARI) = 1 / [(Incidental Oral LOC / Incidental
Oral MOE) + (Inhalation LOC / Inhalation MOE)].
Although a non-cancer dermal risk assessment was not performed due
to the lack of an adverse effect in the non-cancer dermal study, a
dermal cancer exposure and risk assessment was performed because dermal
exposure does contribute to the overall cancer risk for broflanilide.
Post-application cancer risk estimates for adults were calculated
using a linear low-dose extrapolation approach in which a Lifetime
Average Daily Dose (LADD) is first calculated and then compared with a
Q1 * that has been calculated for broflanilide based on dose
response data in the appropriate toxicology study (Q1* =
2.48 x 10-3 (mg/kg/day)-1).
The residential exposure scenario used in the adult non-cancer
aggregate assessment is short-term post-application inhalation exposure
following an indoor surface directed spot application. The residential
exposure scenario used in the non-cancer aggregate assessment of
children 1 to less than 2 years old is the combined inhalation and
hand-to-mouth exposures from short-term post-application exposure to
indoor perimeter/spot coarse and pin stream surface spray applications
on carpet.
The residential exposure scenario used in the adult cancer
aggregate assessment is post-application dermal and inhalation exposure
following an indoor surface directed perimeter/spot application.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found broflanilide to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and broflanilide does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
broflanilide does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the 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. Broflanilide did not
demonstrate any evidence of increased qualitative or quantitative
susceptibility in the rat and rabbit developmental toxicity studies or
the 2-generation rat reproduction study. In the rabbit and rat
developmental toxicity studies, there were no developmental effects up
to the limit dose tested (1000 mg/kg/day). In the reproduction study in
rats, decreased pup weights in F1 and F2 pups occurred at a higher dose
levels than the dose with adverse parental findings.
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 broflanilide is complete.
ii. Acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies showed no evidence
of neurotoxicity in male or female rats. There was no other evidence in
any species tested to indicate neurotoxicity potential. Therefore,
there is no concern for acute or subchronic neurotoxicity resulting
from exposure to broflanilide.
iii. There is no evidence that broflanilide 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. The dietary food exposure assessments
[[Page 81803]]
were performed based on 100 PCT for agricultural uses, a treatment
value of 4.65% for FHE uses, and some anticipated residue data. EPA
made conservative (protective) assumptions in the ground and surface
water modeling used to assess exposure to broflanilide in drinking
water. EPA used similarly conservative assumptions to assess post-
application exposure of children as well as incidental oral exposure of
toddlers. These assessments will not underestimate the exposure and
risks posed by broflanilide.
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,
broflanilide 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
broflanilide from food and water will utilize less than 1% of the cPAD
for children 1 to 2 years old, the population group receiving the
greatest exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of
broflanilide 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).
Broflanilide is proposed for uses that could result in short-term
residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is
appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with
short-term residential exposures to broflanilide.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term food, water,
and residential exposures result in aggregate ARIs of 320 for adults
and 4.4 for children 1 to <2 years old. Because EPA's level of concern
for broflanilide is an ARI of 1 or below, these ARIs are not of
concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure
level).
An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however,
broflanilide is not registered for any use patterns that would result
in intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under
the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment
of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic
dietary risk assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for
broflanilide.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. A cancer aggregate
risk assessment was completed for the proposed residential and dietary
uses of broflanilide using the linear slope factor (Q1 *) of 2.48 x
10-3. The assessment incorporates the adult post-application
dermal and inhalation exposure following an indoor surface directed
perimeter/spot application. The residential assessment is a
conservative calculation which assumes 12 retreatments a year as
allowed by the label at the maximum rate proposed, 365 days of exposure
in the residential setting, and 10% dissipation of residues per day.
The cancer dietary exposure estimate for adults 20-49 years old, the
most highly-exposed adult population subgroup, assumed 100% crop
treated for agricultural uses and the FHE treatment value of 4.65% for
FHE uses. The resulting aggregate cancer risk estimate is 1 x
10-6.
EPA generally considers cancer risks (expressed as the probability
of an increased cancer case) in the range of 1 in 1 million (or 1 x
10-6) or less to be negligible. Accordingly, EPA has
concluded the aggregate cancer risk for all broflanilide uses fall
within the range of 1 x 10-6 and are thus negligible.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate
exposure to broflanilide residues.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
The petitioner proposed a multi-residue method, BASF method D1417/
01, based on QuEChERS (quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, safe) for
the determination of broflanilide residues in plant matrices. This
method has been proven to be suitable for the determination of residues
of broflanilide in plant matrices.
BASF method D1604/01 is proposed as the enforcement method for the
determination of residues of broflanilide and DM-8007 in livestock
commodities by LC-MS/MS. This method has been proven to be suitable for
the determination of residues of broflanilide and DM-8007 in livestock
matrices.
The methods 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.
Broflanilide is a new active ingredient and no MRLs have yet been
established by Codex.
C. Response to Comments
One comment was received in response to the Notice of Filing. The
comment stated in part that ``the notice of the application for these
uses does not contain any information about human toxicity, water
solubility, granular transmissibility, or other information which could
help evaluate the risk of higher levels of use of
[[Page 81804]]
broflanilide'' and that ``perhaps EPA should reissue the notice with
attached information on toxicity and transmission levels.'' A
supporting document summarizing the information on the residue
chemistry, toxicological profile, as well as an estimate of the
aggregate exposure expected was available in the docket at the time the
notice was published. The NOF published on July 24, 2018, referred to
the docket and noted that the summary was available. That document
provided information to help evaluate the risks of broflanilide.
D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
EPA is establishing the tolerance in/on potato, wet peel at 0.08
ppm rather than the petitioned-for tolerance of 0.1 ppm. The Agency's
practice is to use the HAFT value from the field trials and the median
processing factor. Based on these data, the appropriate tolerance for
potato, wet peel is 0.08 ppm.
EPA is not establishing a separate tolerance for corn, sweet,
kernel plus cob with husks removed because it is covered under grain,
cereal, group 15, except rice. Similarly, separate tolerances for corn,
sweet, stover; and corn, sweet forage are not being established because
they are covered under grain, cereal, forage, fodder, and straw, group
16, except rice.
EPA is including the livestock metabolite DM-8007 as a residue of
concern for tolerance enforcement and risk assessment. Therefore, the
tolerance expression for livestock commodities is being revised to
include the metabolite DM-8007.
EPA is establishing a tolerance for residues in milk at 0.02 ppm to
harmonize with Canadian livestock LOQ MRLs. The tolerance of 0.02 ppm
for residues in milk is higher than the anticipated residues in milk
fat; therefore, although the available data support a tolerance for
residues in milk fat at 0.01 ppm, a separate milk fat tolerance is not
necessary at this time.
Lastly, the commodity definitions for the FHE use, egg and crop
group 16 are being modified to be consistent with Agency nomenclature.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of broflanilide,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the following plant
commodities: Amaranth, grain, grain at 0.01 ppm; Amaranth, grain,
stover at 0.01 ppm; Ca[ntilde]ihua, grain at 0.01 ppm; Chia, grain at
0.01 ppm; Corn, field, milled byproducts at 0.015 ppm; Cram-cram, grain
at 0.01 ppm; Grain, cereal, group 15, except rice at 0.01 ppm; Food and
feed commodities (other than those covered by a higher tolerance) at
0.01 ppm; Grain, cereal, forage, fodder, and straw, group 16, except
rice at 0.01 ppm; Huauzontle, grain at 0.01 ppm; Potato, wet peel at
0.08 ppm; Quinoa, forage at 0.01 ppm; Quinoa, grain at 0.01 ppm;
Quinoa, hay at 0.01 ppm; Quinoa, straw at 0.01 ppm; Spelt, grain at
0.01 ppm; Teff, forage at 0.01 ppm; Teff, grain at 0.01 ppm; Teff, hay
at 0.01 ppm; Teff, straw at 0.01 ppm; and Vegetable, tuberous and corm,
subgroup 1C at 0.04 ppm.
Tolerances are also established for residues of broflanilide,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the following
livestock commodities: Cattle, fat at 0.02 ppm; Cattle, meat at 0.02
ppm; Cattle, meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm; Egg at 0.02 ppm; Goat, fat at
0.02 ppm; Goat, meat at 0.02 ppm; Goat, meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm;
Hog, fat at 0.02 ppm; Hog, meat at 0.02 ppm; Hog, meat byproducts at
0.02 ppm; Horse, fat at 0.02 ppm; Horse, meat at 0.02 ppm; Horse, meat
byproducts at 0.02 ppm; Milk at 0.02 ppm; Poultry, fat at 0.02 ppm;
Poultry, meat at 0.02 ppm; Poultry, meat byproducts at 0.02 ppm; Sheep,
fat at 0.02 ppm; Sheep, meat at 0.02 ppm; and Sheep, meat byproducts at
0.02 ppm.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), nor is it considered a
regulatory action under Executive Order 13771, entitled ``Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs'' (82 FR 9339, February 3,
2017). This action does not contain any information collections subject
to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), nor does it require any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerances in
this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
Tribal Governments, on the relationship between the National Government
and the States or Tribal Governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
[[Page 81805]]
Dated: November 30, 2020.
Edward Messina,
Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending
40 CFR chapter I as follows:
PART 180--TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES
IN FOOD
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. Add Sec. 180.714 to subpart C to read as follows:
Sec. 180.714 Broflanilide; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of
broflanilide, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the
commodities to Table 1 of this section. Compliance with the tolerance
levels specified in Table 1 is to be determined by measuring only
broflanilide, 3-(benzoylmethylamino)-N-[2-bromo-4-[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-
1-(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-6-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-2-fluorobenzamide,
in or on the commodity.
Table 1 to Paragraph (a)(1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amaranth, grain, grain...................................... 0.01
Amaranth, grain, stover..................................... 0.01
Ca[ntilde]ihua, grain....................................... 0.01
Chia, grain................................................. 0.01
Corn, field, milled byproducts.............................. 0.015
Cram-cram, grain............................................ 0.01
Grain, cereal, group 15, except rice........................ 0.01
Food and feed commodities (other than those covered by a 0.01
higher tolerance)..........................................
Grain, cereal, forage, fodder, and straw, group 16, except 0.01
rice.......................................................
Huauzontle, grain........................................... 0.01
Potato, wet peel............................................ 0.08
Quinoa, forage.............................................. 0.01
Quinoa, grain............................................... 0.01
Quinoa, hay................................................. 0.01
Quinoa, straw............................................... 0.01
Spelt, grain................................................ 0.01
Teff, forage................................................ 0.01
Teff, grain................................................. 0.01
Teff, hay................................................... 0.01
Teff, straw................................................. 0.01
Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C................... 0.04
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Tolerances are established for residues of broflanilide,
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the commodities to
Table 2 of this section. Compliance with the tolerance levels specified
in Table 2 is to be determined by measuring the sum of broflanilide, 3-
(benzoylmethylamino)-N-[2-bromo-4-[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-
(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-6-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-2-fluorobenzamide,
and its metabolite 3-benzamido-N-[2-bromo-4-(perfluoropropan-2-yl)-6-
(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]-2-fluorobenzamide, calculated as the
stoichiometric equivalent of broflanilide, in or on the commodity.
Table 2 to Paragraph (a)(2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cattle, fat................................................. 0.02
Cattle, meat................................................ 0.02
Cattle, meat byproducts..................................... 0.02
Egg......................................................... 0.02
Goat, fat................................................... 0.02
Goat, meat.................................................. 0.02
Goat, meat byproducts....................................... 0.02
Hog, fat.................................................... 0.02
Hog, meat................................................... 0.02
Hog, meat byproducts........................................ 0.02
Horse, fat.................................................. 0.02
Horse, meat................................................. 0.02
Horse, meat byproducts...................................... 0.02
Milk........................................................ 0.02
Poultry, fat................................................ 0.02
Poultry, meat............................................... 0.02
Poultry, meat byproducts.................................... 0.02
Sheep, fat.................................................. 0.02
Sheep, meat................................................. 0.02
Sheep, meat byproducts...................................... 0.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b)-(d) [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2020-27906 Filed 12-16-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P