Fatty Acids, Esters With Ethoxylated Triethanolamine; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance, 10983-10989 [2022-04123]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 39 / Monday, February 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
services and access, visit https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0364; FRL–9534–01–
OCSPP]
Fatty Acids, Esters With Ethoxylated
Triethanolamine; Exemption From the
Requirement of a Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
I. General Information
This regulation establishes an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of fatty acids, talloil, esters with triethanolamine,
ethoxylated (CAS Reg No. 68605–38–9)
and fatty acids, C8–18 and C18-unsatd.,
esters with polyethylene glycol ether
with triethanolamine (3:1) (CAS Reg No.
2464873–19–4) (herein referred to
20ETO and 10ETO, respectively) when
used as inert ingredients (surfactant) in
pesticide formulations applied to
growing crops pre- and post-harvest, not
to exceed 10% in the final pesticide
formulation. Exponent, Inc. on behalf of
Lamberti USA, Incorporated submitted a
petition to EPA under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
requesting establishment of an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance. This regulation eliminates the
need to establish a maximum
permissible level for residues of 20ETO
and 10ETO.
DATES: This regulation is effective
February 28, 2022. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before April 29, 2022, 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–2021–0364, 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 open to
visitors by appointment only. For the
latest status information on EPA/DC
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Feb 25, 2022
Jkt 256001
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: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY 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 40 CFR part 180
through the Office of the Federal
Register’s e-CFR site at https://
www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.
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–2021–0364 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing and must be received
by the Hearing Clerk on or before April
29, 2022. 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10983
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–
2021–0364, 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. Petition for Exemption
In the Federal Register of August 3,
2021 (86 FR 41809) (FRL–8792–01),
EPA issued a document pursuant to
FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a,
announcing the filing of a pesticide
petition (PP IN–11506) by Exponent,
Inc. (1150 Connecticut Ave., Suite 1100,
Washington, DC 20036) on behalf of
Lamberti USA, Incorporated (P.O. Box
1000, Hungerford, TX 77448). The
petition requested that the 40 CFR be
amended by establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of 20ETO (CAS Reg No. 68605–
38–9) and 10ETO (CAS Reg No.
2464873–19–4) when used as inert
ingredients (surfactant) in pesticide
formulations applied to growing crops
pre- and post-harvest under 40 CFR
180.910. That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by
Exponent, Inc. on behalf of Lamberti
USA, Incorporated, the petitioner,
which is available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. No comments
were received on the notice of filing.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition, EPA has limited
the maximum concentration of 20ETO
or 10ETO to not more than 10% in
pesticide formulations for use under 40
CFR 180.910. This limitation is based on
the Agency’s risk assessment which can
be found at https://www.regulations.gov
in the document titled ‘‘Fatty acids,
Tall-Oil, Esters with Triethanolamine,
Ethoxylated (20ETO) and Fatty Acids,
C8–18 or C18-Unsatd., Esters with
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
28FER1
10984
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 39 / Monday, February 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
Polyethylene Glycol Ether with
Triethanolamine (3:1) (10ETO); Human
Health Risk Assessment and Ecological
Effects Assessment to Support Proposed
Exemption from the Requirement of a
Tolerance When Used as Inert
Ingredients in Pesticide Formulations’’
in docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2021–0364.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients
that are not active ingredients as defined
in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are
not limited to, the following types of
ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own):
Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as
polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and
diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose;
wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol
dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ‘‘inert’’ is not
intended to imply nontoxicity; the
ingredient may or may not be
chemically active. Generally, EPA has
exempted inert ingredients from the
requirement of a tolerance based on the
low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish an exemption
from the requirement for 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 . . . .’’
EPA establishes exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance only in those
cases where it can be clearly
demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide
chemical residues under reasonably
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Feb 25, 2022
Jkt 256001
foreseeable circumstances will pose no
appreciable risks to human health. In
order to determine the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the
toxicity of the inert in conjunction with
possible exposure to residues of the
inert ingredient through food, drinking
water, and through other exposures that
occur as a result of pesticide use in
residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a finite tolerance is not
necessary to ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be
established.
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(c)(2)(A), and the factors specified in
FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), 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 20ETO and
10ETO including exposure resulting
from the exemption established by this
action. EPA’s assessment of exposures
and risks associated with 20ETO and
10ETO follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available
toxicity data and considered their
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. Specific
information on the studies received and
the nature of the adverse effects caused
by 20ETO and 10ETO as well as the noobserved-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL)
and the lowest-observed-adverse-effectlevel (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies
are discussed in this unit.
EPA considered studies on either
substance to evaluate the toxicity of
both substances. Based on the available
data, the acute oral toxicity is expected
to be low for 20ETO and 10ETO because
the oral LD50 (lethal dose) for 20ETO is
greater than 2,000 milligrams/kilogram
(mg/kg). Both substances are also not
expected to be acutely toxic via dermal
exposure, as the LD50 for 20ETO is
greater than 2,000 mg/kg in rats. The
substances are also not expected to be
irritating to the skin in the rat and rabbit
nor sensitizing to the guinea pig.
However, the substances are expected to
be minimally irritating to the rabbit eye.
No repeated-dose toxicity studies are
available for 10ETO or 20ETO.
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Therefore, data for triethanolamine
(TEA) and fatty acids, tall oil were used,
based on the predicted degradation
pathways of 20ETO and 10ETO.
Subchronic oral toxicity studies in
guinea pigs via gavage (TEA) and rats
(fatty acids, tall oil) via the diet resulted
in hepatocellular cloudy swelling and
fatty change in the liver and cloudy
swelling of the convoluted tubules and
Henle’s loop in the kidney at 400 and
450 mg/kg/day, respectively, following
60- and 120-day exposures. The no
observed adverse effect level (NOAEL)
in these studies is 200 and 225 mg/kg/
day for the guinea pig and rat,
respectively. Increased liver and kidney
weights and histological lesions are
observed at 730 mg/kg/day in a 90-day
oral toxicity study in rats. The NOAEL
in this study is 170 mg/kg/day. Chronic
exposure via drinking water (TEA)
resulted in an increased incidence and
severity of chronic nephropathy at 455
mg/kg/day in rats. No LOAEL was
established in this study. In mice,
decreased body weight was observed at
1,688 mg/kg/day following chronic
exposure via drinking water (TEA).
In subchronic dermal toxicity studies,
no systemic toxicity was observed up to
1,000 mg/kg/day, the limit dose, in rats.
However, in the same study, an
increased incidence of hypertrophy of
the pituitary gland pars intermedia was
observed at 2,000 mg/kg/day and dermal
effects manifested as increased
incidence and severity of acanthosis and
inflammation at 500 mg/kg/day. In
mice, no systemic toxicity was observed
up to 4,000 mg/kg/day following 13
weeks of exposure. Mild dermal
hyperplasia was observed at 140 mg/kg/
day and an increased incidence and
severity of acanthosis was seen at 250
mg/kg/day.
Following chronic dermal exposure in
rats, an increased incidence of
acanthosis and inflammation along with
ulcers and dermal erosion was observed
at 63 mg/kg/day.
A developmental toxicity study
showed no maternal or developmental
toxicity up to 1,125 mg/kg/day in mice.
Another developmental toxicity study
via the dermal exposure showed no
toxicity up to 30 mg/kg/day, which was
the highest dose tested in rats. Further,
no parental, offspring, or reproduction
toxicity was observed in a 2-generation
reproduction toxicity study in rats (fatty
acid, tall oil) up to 5,000 mg/kg/day. In
a combined reproduction/
developmental toxicity test, a decrease
in the number of implantation sites and
litter size, and an increase in the
number of post-implantation loss were
observed at 1,000 mg/kg/day. The
NOAEL is 300 mg/kg/day. However,
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
28FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 39 / Monday, February 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
there is no concern for fetal
susceptibility or reproduction toxicity
since the cRfD (0.455 mg/kg/day) is
protective of effects seen at 1,000 mg/
kg/day.
Several mutagenicity studies with
TEA and fatty acids, tall oil (e.g., Ames,
chromosome aberration, micronucleus
assay, sister chromatid exchange, and
cell dominant lethal assay) were
reviewed and the results for these
studies are negative.
Two chronic/carcinogenicity studies
in which the test substance was
administered via drinking water were
also reviewed. In mice, decreased
bodyweight was observed at 1,688 mg/
kg/day. The NOAEL is 673 mg/kg/day.
No evidence of an increased incidence
of tumors was seen in this study. In rats,
chronic nephropathy is observed in
female rats at 455 mg/kg/day. A NOAEL
was not established in this study. An
increased incidence of hepatocellular
adenomas was observed at doses greater
than 1,000 mg/kg/day. The chronic
reference dose (cRfD) is based on this
study.
Neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity
studies are not available for review.
However, evidence of neurotoxicity and
immunotoxicity was not observed in the
submitted studies.
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
10985
observed (the NOAEL) and the lowest
dose at which adverse effects of concern
are identified (the LOAEL). Uncertainty/
safety factors are used in conjunction
with the POD to calculate a safe
exposure level—generally referred to as
a population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a
reference dose (RfD)—and a safe margin
of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold
risks, the Agency assumes that any
amount of exposure will lead to some
degree of risk. Thus, the Agency
estimates risk in terms of the probability
of an occurrence of the adverse effect
expected in a lifetime. For more
information on the general principles
EPA uses in risk characterization and a
complete description of the risk
assessment process, see https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/
riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological
endpoints for 20ETO and 10ETO used
for human risk assessment is shown in
Table 1 of this unit.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR 20ETO AND 10ETO FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK
ASSESSMENT
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Exposure/scenario
Point of departure
and uncertainty/safety
factors
RfD, PAD, LOC for risk
assessment
Study and toxicological effects
Acute dietary (Females 13 to 50
years of age, General population
including infants and children).
An acute effect was not found in the database therefore an acute dietary assessment is not necessary.
Chronic dietary (All populations) ........
LOAEL= 455 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
UFL = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
Chronic RfD = 0.455
mg/kg/day.
cPAD = 0.455 mg/kg/
day.
Chronic/Carcinogenicity Study (TEA).
LOAEL = 455 mg/kg/day based on chronic nephropathy in female rats.
Incidental oral intermediate-term (1 to
6 months).
NOAEL= 300 mg/kg/day
UFA = 10x UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 100 .....
Combined Reproduction/Developmental (TEA). LOAEL = 1,000 mg/kg/
day based on decreased number of implantation sites and litter size,
and an increased number of post-implantation loss.
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 days) ..
Inhalation study NOAEL
= 43.39 mg/kg/day
(inhalation absorption
rate = 100%).
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 100 .....
16-Day Inhalation Toxicity Study (TEA). LOAEL = 86.77 mg/kg/day
based on laryngeal inflammation.
Inhalation intermediate-term (1 to 6
months).
Inhalation study NOAEL
= 43.39 mg/kg/day
(inhalation absorption
rate = 100%).
UFA = 10x
UFH = 10x
UFs = 10x
FQPA SF = 1x
LOC for MOE = 1000 ...
16-Day Inhalation Toxicity Study (TEA) LOAEL = 86.77 mg/kg/day
based on laryngeal inflammation.
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) ......
There is no evidence of carcinogenicity in the available database. The RfD approach is protective of any potential carcinogenic effects.
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day.
MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data deficiency. UFH = potential variation in
sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term risk
assessment.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to 20ETO and 10ETO, EPA
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:16 Feb 25, 2022
Jkt 256001
considered exposure under the
proposed exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. EPA
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
assessed dietary exposures from 20ETO
and 10ETO in food as follows:
In conducting the chronic dietary
exposure assessment using the Dietary
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
28FER1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
10986
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 39 / Monday, February 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
Exposure Evaluation Model DEEM–
FCIDTM, Version 3.16, EPA used food
consumption information from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s)
2003–2008 National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We
Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As
to residue levels in food, no residue data
were submitted for 10ETO and 20ETO.
In the absence of specific residue data,
EPA has developed an approach which
uses surrogate information to derive
upper bound exposure estimates for the
subject inert ingredient. Upper bound
exposure estimates are based on the
highest tolerance for a given commodity
from a list of high use insecticides,
herbicides, and fungicides. A complete
description of the general approach
taken to assess inert ingredient risks in
the absence of residue data is contained
in the memorandum entitled ‘‘Alkyl
Amines Polyalkoxylates (Cluster 4):
Acute and Chronic Aggregate (Food and
Drinking Water) Dietary Exposure and
Risk Assessments for the Inerts,’’
(D361707, S. Piper, 2/25/09) and can be
found at https://www.regulations.gov in
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–
0738.
Generally, in the dietary exposure
assessments for inert ingredients, the
Agency assumes that the residue level of
the inert ingredient would be no higher
than the highest tolerance for a given
commodity. Implicit in this assumption
is that there would be similar rates of
degradation (if any) between the active
and inert ingredient and that the
concentration of inert ingredient in the
scenarios leading to these highest levels
of tolerances would be no higher than
the concentration of the active
ingredient.
The Agency believes the assumptions
used to estimate dietary exposures lead
to an extremely conservative assessment
of dietary risk due to a series of
compounded conservatisms. First,
assuming that the level of residue for an
inert ingredient is equal to the level of
residue for the active ingredient will
overstate exposure. The concentrations
of active ingredient in agricultural
products are generally at least 50
percent of the product and often can be
much higher. However, in assessing this
petition request, the Agency assumed
that a product consisted of 10% percent
10ETO and 20ETO. Further, pesticide
products rarely have a single inert
ingredient; rather there is generally a
combination of different inert
ingredients used which additionally
reduces the concentration of any single
inert ingredient in the pesticide product
in relation to that of the active
ingredient.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Feb 25, 2022
Jkt 256001
Second, the conservatism of this
methodology is compounded by EPA’s
decision to assume that, for each
commodity, the active ingredient which
will serve as a guide to the potential
level of inert ingredient residues is the
active ingredient with the highest
tolerance level. This assumption
overstates residue values because it
would be highly unlikely, given the
high number of inert ingredients, that a
single inert ingredient or class of
ingredients would be present at the
level of the active ingredient in the
highest tolerance for every commodity.
Finally, a third compounding
conservatism is EPA’s assumption that
all foods contain the inert ingredient at
the highest tolerance level. In other
words, EPA assumed 100 percent of all
foods are treated with the inert
ingredient at the rate and manner
necessary to produce the highest residue
legally possible for an active ingredient.
In summary, EPA chose a very
conservative method for estimating
what level of inert residue could be on
food, then used this methodology to
choose the highest possible residue that
could be found on food and assumed
that all food contained this residue. No
consideration was given to potential
degradation between harvest and
consumption even though monitoring
data shows that tolerance level residues
are typically one to two orders of
magnitude higher than actual residues
in food when distributed in commerce.
Accordingly, although sufficient
information to quantify actual residue
levels in food is not available, this
conservative assumption will lead to a
significant exaggeration of actual
exposures. EPA does not believe that
this approach underestimates exposure
in the absence of residue data.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. For the purpose of the screening
level dietary risk assessment to support
this request for an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for 10ETO
and 20ETO, a conservative drinking
water concentration value of 100 ppb
based on screening level modeling was
used to assess the contribution to
drinking water for the chronic dietary
risk assessments for parent compound.
These values were directly entered into
the dietary exposure model.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The
term ‘‘residential exposure’’ is used in
this document to refer to nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers),
carpets, swimming pools, for lawn and
garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, flea and tick control on
pets, and hard surface disinfection on
walls, floors, tables).
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
20ETO and 10ETO may be used as an
inert ingredient in pesticide products
that are registered for specific uses that
may result in residential exposure, such
as pesticides used in and around the
home. For residential handlers, the
Agency assumed handlers may receive
short-term dermal and inhalation
exposure to 20ETO and 10ETO from
formulations containing the inert
ingredient in outdoor and indoor
scenarios. Short- and intermediate-term
dermal exposures were not quantitated
since no systemic toxicity is observed in
dermal toxicity studies. Also,
intermediate- and long-term inhalation
exposures are not expected because
applications are not expected to occur
daily or for more than 30 days.
Therefore, only short-term inhalation
exposures were estimated and were
based on the NOAEL of 43.39 mg/kg/
day and a LOC for an MOE of 100. The
short-term residential handler MOE is
36000, which is not a risk of concern
because EPA considers MOEs of 100 or
less to be of concern. The Agency also
considered intermediate-term incidental
oral exposures to children due to
residential exposure associated with
contact with treated surfaces (dermal
and hand-to-mouth exposures). The
MOE is 1964 for children, which is not
a risk of concern because EPA considers
MOEs of 100 or less to be of concern.
As introduced above, 10ETO and
20ETO are expected to biodegrade into
TEA and fatty acids, tall oil. Residential
exposure to TEA may occur from
existing pesticide uses as well as from
non-pesticide products that may be used
in and around the home, such as
cosmetics. Dermal contact is the
primary route of exposure to TEA in
cosmetics. However, a dermal endpoint
of concern was not identified, and
therefore a quantitative dermal exposure
assessment is not necessary. TEA can be
used in products that may be sprayed,
however, so there is the potential for
inhalation exposure. The Cosmetic
Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel
has noted that 95% to 99% of TEA
particles produced in cosmetic aerosols
are not respirable. This assumption,
coupled with the small actual exposure
in the breathing zone and the
concentrations at which TEA is used,
suggests that inhalation would not be a
significant route of exposure that might
lead to local respiratory or systemic
toxic effects (Fiume et. al., 2013). Small
amounts of TEA may also be ingested
(oral exposure) from lipsticks as they are
reported to potentially contain up to 1%
TEA. However, any contribution to the
estimated oral pesticide exposure
resulting from cosmetic uses is likely to
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
28FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 39 / Monday, February 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
be insignificant in comparison to the
estimates for exposure from the
pesticide use.
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 20ETO and 10ETO
to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and
20ETO and 10ETO do not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by
other substances. For the purposes of
this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that 20ETO and 10ETO do not
have a common mechanism of toxicity
with other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and
Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of
FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply
an additional tenfold (10X) margin of
safety for infants and children in the
case of threshold effects to account for
prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the
completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
FQPA Safety Factor (SF). In applying
this provision, EPA either retains the
default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional safety factor when reliable
data available to EPA support the choice
of a different factor.
The Agency has concluded that there
is reliable data to determine that infants
and children will be safe if the FQPA SF
of 10x is reduced to 1X for the chronic
dietary assessment for the following
reasons. The toxicity database for
20ETO and 10ETO contains
developmental, 2-generation
reproduction, combined reproduction/
developmental toxicity and
mutagenicity studies. There is no
indication of immunotoxicity or
neurotoxicity in the available studies;
therefore, there is no need to require an
immunotoxicity or neurotoxicity study.
Additionally, no fetal susceptibility or
reproduction toxicity was observed in
the available studies. Based on the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Feb 25, 2022
Jkt 256001
adequacy of the toxicity database, the
conservative nature of the exposure
assessment and the lack of concern for
prenatal and postnatal sensitivity, the
Agency has concluded that there is
reliable data to determine that infants
and children will be safe if the FQPA SF
of 10x is reduced to 1X.
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, 20ETO and 10ETO
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 20ETO and
10ETO from food and water will utilize
32.6% of the cPAD for children 1–2
years old, the population group
receiving the greatest exposure.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure generally takes into
account short-term residential exposure
plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level).
20ETO and 10ETO may be used as
inert ingredients in pesticide products
that could result in short-term
residential exposure. The Agency has
determined that it is not appropriate to
aggregate chronic exposure through food
and water with short-term residential
exposures to 20ETO and 10ETO since
toxicological effects were different
depending on the route of exposure.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for short-term
exposures, EPA has concluded the
combined short-term residential
exposures result in aggregate MOEs of
36000 for adult males and females.
Because EPA’s level of concern for
20ETO and 10ETO is an MOE of 100 or
below, this MOE is not of concern.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10987
takes into account intermediate-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
20ETO and 10ETO may be used as
inert ingredients in pesticide products
that could result in intermediate-term
residential exposure, and the Agency
has determined that it is not appropriate
to aggregate chronic exposure through
food and water with intermediate-term
residential exposures to 20ETO and
10ETO since toxicological effects were
different depending on the route of
exposure.
Using the exposure assumptions
described in this unit for intermediateterm exposures, EPA has concluded that
the combined intermediate-term food,
water, and residential exposures result
in an aggregate MOE of 1964 for
children. Children’s residential
exposure includes total exposures
associated with contact with treated
surfaces (dermal and hand-to-mouth
exposures). Because EPA’s level of
concern for children’s residential
exposure (incidental oral exposure) to
20ETO and 10ETO is an MOE of 100 or
below, this MOE is not of concern.
5. Long-term risk. Long-term aggregate
exposure takes into account long-term
residential exposure plus chronic
exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).
Long-term residential exposures are
not expected from the use of 20ETO and
10ETO in pesticides used in and around
the home. Therefore, long-term
aggregate exposure considers chronic
food and water. The MOE is 10833
based on the cPAD of 0.455 mg/kg/day.
As the level of concern is for an MOE
that is lower than 1000, this MOE is not
of concern.
TEA, a metabolite of 10ETO and
20ETO, may be used as inert ingredients
in non-pesticide products that could
result in long-term residential exposure.
Based on the exposure assumptions
described in unit IV. C. 3, the Agency
anticipates that the contribution to the
estimated oral non-pesticide exposure
due to its use in cosmetics is likely to
be insignificant in comparison to the
estimates for exposure from the
pesticide use. Therefore, the Agency
believes the assessments of aggregate
exposures due to pesticide uses more
than adequately protect for exposure
from uses in cosmetics products.
6. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of tumors
in the carcinogenicity studies in rats
and mice and the lack of mutagenicity,
20ETO and 10ETO are not expected to
pose a cancer risk to humans.
7. Determination of safety. Taking
into consideration all available
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
28FER1
10988
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 39 / Monday, February 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
information on 20ETO and 10ETO, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result to the
general population, including infants
and children, from aggregate exposure
to 20ETO and 10ETO residues.
V. Other Considerations
Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An analytical method is not required
for enforcement purposes since the
Agency is not establishing a numerical
tolerance for residues of 20ETO and
10ETO in or on any food commodities.
EPA is establishing a limitation on the
amount of 20ETO and 10ETO that may
be used in pesticide formulations. This
limitation will be enforced through the
pesticide registration process under the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (‘‘FIFRA’’), 7 U.S.C.
136 et seq. EPA will not register any
pesticide formulation for food use that
exceeds 10% in the final pesticide
formulations for indoor and outdoor
residential use.
VI. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance is established
for residues of 20ETO (CAS Reg No.
68605–38–9) and 10ETO (CAS Reg No.
2464873–19–4) when used as inert
ingredients (surfactant) in pesticide
formulations applied to growing crops
pre- and post-harvest under 40 CFR
180.910.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes a tolerance
exemption 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).
This action does not contain any
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Feb 25, 2022
Jkt 256001
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), EPA seeks to achieve
environmental justice, the fair treatment
and meaningful involvement of any
group, including minority and/or lowincome populations, in the
development, implementation, and
enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies. As such, to the
extent that information is publicly
available or was submitted in comments
to EPA, the Agency considered whether
groups or segments of the population, as
a result of their location, cultural
practices, or other factors, may have
atypical or disproportionately high and
adverse human health impacts or
environmental effects from exposure to
the pesticide discussed in this
document, compared to the general
population.
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers,
food processors, food handlers, and food
retailers, not States or tribes, nor does
this action alter the relationships or
distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress
in the preemption provisions of FFDCA
section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency
has determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on States
or Tribal Governments, on the
relationship between the National
Government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132,
entitled ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999) and Executive Order
13175, entitled ‘‘Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments’’ (65 FR 67249, November
9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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).
VIII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: February 22, 2022.
Marietta Echeverria,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the
preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR part
180 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:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. In § 180.910, amend Table 1 to
180.910 by adding in alphabetical order
the inert ingredients ‘‘Fatty acids, talloil, esters with triethanolamine,
ethoxylated’’ and ‘‘Fatty acids, C8–18 and
C18-unsatd., esters with polyethylene
glycol ether with triethanolamine (3:1)’’
to reads as follows:
■
§ 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and
post-harvest; exemptions from the
requirement of a tolerance.
*
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
*
*
28FER1
*
*
10989
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 39 / Monday, February 28, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1 TO 180.910
Limits
(%)
Inert ingredients
*
*
*
*
*
*
Fatty acids, tall-oil, esters with triethanolamine, ethoxylated (CAS Reg. No. 68605–38–9) ..................................
Fatty acids, C8–18 and C18-unsatd., esters with polyethylene glycol ether with triethanolamine (3:1) (CAS Reg.
No. 2464873–19–4).
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
II. Discussion and Analysis
48 CFR Part 206
[Docket DARS–2019–0051]
RIN 0750–AK67
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Exception to
Competition for Certain Follow-On
Production Contracts (DFARS Case
2019–D031)
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
DoD is issuing a final rule
amending the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement
(DFARS) to implement a section of the
National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 that modifies the
criteria required to exempt from
competition certain follow-on
production contracts.
DATES: Effective February 28, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Kimberly R. Ziegler, telephone 571–
372–6095.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
I. Background
DoD published a proposed rule in the
Federal Register at 84 FR 50811 on
September 26, 2019, to amend DFARS
206.001 to implement section 815 of the
National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 (Pub.
L. 114–92). Section 815 repeals and
replaces section 845 of the NDAA for FY
1994 (Pub. L. 103–160; 10 U.S.C. 2371
note) with 10 U.S.C. 2371b, which
modifies the authority of DoD to carry
out other transaction (OT) agreements
for prototype projects, as well as the
criteria required to award an associated
16:12 Feb 25, 2022
Jkt 256001
*
follow-on production contract to the
participants in the other transaction
agreement without the use of
competitive procedures. One
respondent submitted comments on the
proposed rule.
[FR Doc. 2022–04123 Filed 2–25–22; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
A. Summary of Significant Changes
The purpose of this rule is to provide
contracting officers with updated
internal guidance when awarding a
follow-on production contract that is
exempt from the competitive procedures
of Federal Acquisition Regulation part
6, as set forth in 10 U.S.C. 2371b. The
rule is not intended to implement
policy, regulation, or guidance on DoD’s
authority to enter into OT prototype
agreements at 10 U.S.C. 2371b. As such,
this final rule changes the rule text to
specify that the agreements officer for
the OT agreement for the prototype
project is responsible for providing to
the contracting officer information that
confirms the requirements to award a
noncompetitive follow-on production
contract, as specified in 10 U.S.C. 2371b
and DoD OT agreement policy, have
been met.
B. Analysis of Public Comments
DoD reviewed the public comments in
the development of the final rule. A
discussion of the comments and the
changes made to the rule as a result of
those comments is provided, as follows:
Comment: The respondent advised
that DoD should provide clear guidance
on what constitutes ‘‘successful
completion’’ of a prototype transaction;
the rule text should be clarified to
explain what it means to award a
follow-on production contract to ‘‘the
participants in the transaction,’’ as
contracts are usually made between the
Government and a single entity; the rule
should clarify what a ‘‘participant’’ is,
given that not all parties to a transaction
necessarily participate in the project.
The respondent also advised that the
rule should be revised to clarify the
prerequisites for awarding the OT for
the prototype project and the
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Uses
*
10
10
*
Surfactant.
Surfactant.
*
prerequisites for awarding a follow-on
production contract. Specifically, one of
the criteria for awarding a follow-on
production contract is that the OT for
the prototype project is based on
specific determinations made by certain
acquisition officials according to
different threshold values. The
proposed rule, however, applies these
determination requirements only to the
follow-on production contract, when
they should instead apply only to the
initial OT agreement.
Response: This rule is not intended to
implement policy, regulation, or
guidance on DoD’s authority to enter
into OT prototype agreements at 10
U.S.C. 2371b. Instead, the Office of the
Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition and Sustainment
(OUSD(A&S)) is the organization
responsible for promulgation of policy
for OT agreements, which can be
viewed at https://aaf.dau.edu/aaf/otguide/. As a result, this rule is modified
to clarify that the contracting officer
does not make the determination that
the prototype project was successfully
completed and, instead, should receive
that information from the agreements
officer for the OT agreement.
Comment: The respondent advised
that 32 CFR part 3 should be updated
to reflect the current authority at 10
U.S.C. 2371b.
Response: This comment is outside
the scope of this rule, which amends 48
CFR chapter 2.
C. Other Changes
The proposed numbering of the
DFARS text is redesignated as DFARS
206.001–70 from 206.001(S–70) to align
with FAR system drafting conventions.
III. Applicability to Contracts at or
Below the Simplified Acquisition
Threshold, for Commercial Products
Including Commercially Available Offthe-Shelf Items, and for Commercial
Services
This rule only impacts the internal
operating procedures of the agency. The
rule does not impose any new
requirements on contracts at or below
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
28FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 39 (Monday, February 28, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10983-10989]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04123]
[[Page 10983]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0364; FRL-9534-01-OCSPP]
Fatty Acids, Esters With Ethoxylated Triethanolamine; Exemption
From the Requirement of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of fatty acids, tall-oil, esters with
triethanolamine, ethoxylated (CAS Reg No. 68605-38-9) and fatty acids,
C8-18 and C18-unsatd., esters with polyethylene
glycol ether with triethanolamine (3:1) (CAS Reg No. 2464873-19-4)
(herein referred to 20ETO and 10ETO, respectively) when used as inert
ingredients (surfactant) in pesticide formulations applied to growing
crops pre- and post-harvest, not to exceed 10% in the final pesticide
formulation. Exponent, Inc. on behalf of Lamberti USA, Incorporated
submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA), requesting establishment of an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance. This regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level for residues of 20ETO and 10ETO.
DATES: This regulation is effective February 28, 2022. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 29, 2022, 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-2021-0364, 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 open to
visitors by appointment only. For the latest status information on EPA/
DC services and 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 40 CFR
part 180 through the Office of the Federal Register's e-CFR site at
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.
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-2021-0364 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
April 29, 2022. 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-2021-0364, 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. Petition for Exemption
In the Federal Register of August 3, 2021 (86 FR 41809) (FRL-8792-
01), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C.
346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP IN-11506) by
Exponent, Inc. (1150 Connecticut Ave., Suite 1100, Washington, DC
20036) on behalf of Lamberti USA, Incorporated (P.O. Box 1000,
Hungerford, TX 77448). The petition requested that the 40 CFR be
amended by establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of 20ETO (CAS Reg No. 68605-38-9) and 10ETO (CAS
Reg No. 2464873-19-4) when used as inert ingredients (surfactant) in
pesticide formulations applied to growing crops pre- and post-harvest
under 40 CFR 180.910. That document referenced a summary of the
petition prepared by Exponent, Inc. on behalf of Lamberti USA,
Incorporated, the petitioner, which is available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. No comments were received on the notice of
filing.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has
limited the maximum concentration of 20ETO or 10ETO to not more than
10% in pesticide formulations for use under 40 CFR 180.910. This
limitation is based on the Agency's risk assessment which can be found
at https://www.regulations.gov in the document titled ``Fatty acids,
Tall-Oil, Esters with Triethanolamine, Ethoxylated (20ETO) and Fatty
Acids, C8-18 or C18-Unsatd., Esters with
[[Page 10984]]
Polyethylene Glycol Ether with Triethanolamine (3:1) (10ETO); Human
Health Risk Assessment and Ecological Effects Assessment to Support
Proposed Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance When Used as
Inert Ingredients in Pesticide Formulations'' in docket ID number EPA-
HQ-OPP-2021-0364.
III. Inert Ingredient Definition
Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.
IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for 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 . . . .''
EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the
inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures
that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA
is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be established.
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), 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 20ETO and 10ETO including
exposure resulting from the exemption established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with 20ETO and 10ETO
follows.
A. Toxicological Profile
EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
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. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by 20ETO and 10ETO as well as the no-
observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-
effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in this
unit.
EPA considered studies on either substance to evaluate the toxicity
of both substances. Based on the available data, the acute oral
toxicity is expected to be low for 20ETO and 10ETO because the oral
LD50 (lethal dose) for 20ETO is greater than 2,000
milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg). Both substances are also not expected to
be acutely toxic via dermal exposure, as the LD50 for 20ETO
is greater than 2,000 mg/kg in rats. The substances are also not
expected to be irritating to the skin in the rat and rabbit nor
sensitizing to the guinea pig. However, the substances are expected to
be minimally irritating to the rabbit eye.
No repeated-dose toxicity studies are available for 10ETO or 20ETO.
Therefore, data for triethanolamine (TEA) and fatty acids, tall oil
were used, based on the predicted degradation pathways of 20ETO and
10ETO. Subchronic oral toxicity studies in guinea pigs via gavage (TEA)
and rats (fatty acids, tall oil) via the diet resulted in
hepatocellular cloudy swelling and fatty change in the liver and cloudy
swelling of the convoluted tubules and Henle's loop in the kidney at
400 and 450 mg/kg/day, respectively, following 60- and 120-day
exposures. The no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) in these
studies is 200 and 225 mg/kg/day for the guinea pig and rat,
respectively. Increased liver and kidney weights and histological
lesions are observed at 730 mg/kg/day in a 90-day oral toxicity study
in rats. The NOAEL in this study is 170 mg/kg/day. Chronic exposure via
drinking water (TEA) resulted in an increased incidence and severity of
chronic nephropathy at 455 mg/kg/day in rats. No LOAEL was established
in this study. In mice, decreased body weight was observed at 1,688 mg/
kg/day following chronic exposure via drinking water (TEA).
In subchronic dermal toxicity studies, no systemic toxicity was
observed up to 1,000 mg/kg/day, the limit dose, in rats. However, in
the same study, an increased incidence of hypertrophy of the pituitary
gland pars intermedia was observed at 2,000 mg/kg/day and dermal
effects manifested as increased incidence and severity of acanthosis
and inflammation at 500 mg/kg/day. In mice, no systemic toxicity was
observed up to 4,000 mg/kg/day following 13 weeks of exposure. Mild
dermal hyperplasia was observed at 140 mg/kg/day and an increased
incidence and severity of acanthosis was seen at 250 mg/kg/day.
Following chronic dermal exposure in rats, an increased incidence
of acanthosis and inflammation along with ulcers and dermal erosion was
observed at 63 mg/kg/day.
A developmental toxicity study showed no maternal or developmental
toxicity up to 1,125 mg/kg/day in mice. Another developmental toxicity
study via the dermal exposure showed no toxicity up to 30 mg/kg/day,
which was the highest dose tested in rats. Further, no parental,
offspring, or reproduction toxicity was observed in a 2-generation
reproduction toxicity study in rats (fatty acid, tall oil) up to 5,000
mg/kg/day. In a combined reproduction/developmental toxicity test, a
decrease in the number of implantation sites and litter size, and an
increase in the number of post-implantation loss were observed at 1,000
mg/kg/day. The NOAEL is 300 mg/kg/day. However,
[[Page 10985]]
there is no concern for fetal susceptibility or reproduction toxicity
since the cRfD (0.455 mg/kg/day) is protective of effects seen at 1,000
mg/kg/day.
Several mutagenicity studies with TEA and fatty acids, tall oil
(e.g., Ames, chromosome aberration, micronucleus assay, sister
chromatid exchange, and cell dominant lethal assay) were reviewed and
the results for these studies are negative.
Two chronic/carcinogenicity studies in which the test substance was
administered via drinking water were also reviewed. In mice, decreased
bodyweight was observed at 1,688 mg/kg/day. The NOAEL is 673 mg/kg/day.
No evidence of an increased incidence of tumors was seen in this study.
In rats, chronic nephropathy is observed in female rats at 455 mg/kg/
day. A NOAEL was not established in this study. An increased incidence
of hepatocellular adenomas was observed at doses greater than 1,000 mg/
kg/day. The chronic reference dose (cRfD) is based on this study.
Neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity studies are not available for
review. However, evidence of neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity was not
observed in the submitted studies.
B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL)
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete
description of the risk assessment process, see https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
A summary of the toxicological endpoints for 20ETO and 10ETO used
for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.
Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for 20ETO and 10ETO for Use in Human Risk Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point of departure
Exposure/scenario and uncertainty/ RfD, PAD, LOC for Study and toxicological effects
safety factors risk assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (Females 13 to 50 An acute effect was not found in the database therefore an acute dietary
years of age, General population assessment is not necessary.
including infants and children).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations) LOAEL= 455 mg/kg/day Chronic RfD = 0.455 Chronic/Carcinogenicity Study
UFA = 10x........... mg/kg/day. (TEA).
UFH = 10x........... cPAD = 0.455 mg/kg/ LOAEL = 455 mg/kg/day based on
UFL = 10x........... day.. chronic nephropathy in female
FQPA SF = 1x........ rats.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidental oral intermediate-term NOAEL= 300 mg/kg/day LOC for MOE = 100.. Combined Reproduction/
(1 to 6 months). UFA = 10x UFH = 10x. Developmental (TEA). LOAEL =
FQPA SF = 1x........ 1,000 mg/kg/day based on
decreased number of implantation
sites and litter size, and an
increased number of post-
implantation loss.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 Inhalation study LOC for MOE = 100.. 16-Day Inhalation Toxicity Study
days). NOAEL = 43.39 mg/kg/ (TEA). LOAEL = 86.77 mg/kg/day
day (inhalation based on laryngeal inflammation.
absorption rate =
100%).
UFA = 10x...........
UFH = 10x...........
FQPA SF = 1x........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inhalation intermediate-term (1 Inhalation study LOC for MOE = 1000. 16-Day Inhalation Toxicity Study
to 6 months). NOAEL = 43.39 mg/kg/ (TEA) LOAEL = 86.77 mg/kg/day
day (inhalation based on laryngeal inflammation.
absorption rate =
100%).
UFA = 10x...........
UFH = 10x...........
UFs = 10x...........
FQPA SF = 1x........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) There is no evidence of carcinogenicity in the available database. The RfD
approach is protective of any potential carcinogenic effects.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level
of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-observed-adverse-effect-
level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor.
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other
data deficiency. UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population
(intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term
risk assessment.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to 20ETO and 10ETO, EPA considered exposure under the proposed
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. EPA assessed dietary
exposures from 20ETO and 10ETO in food as follows:
In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment using the
Dietary
[[Page 10986]]
Exposure Evaluation Model DEEM-FCIDTM, Version 3.16, EPA used food
consumption information from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
(USDA's) 2003-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey,
What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, no
residue data were submitted for 10ETO and 20ETO. In the absence of
specific residue data, EPA has developed an approach which uses
surrogate information to derive upper bound exposure estimates for the
subject inert ingredient. Upper bound exposure estimates are based on
the highest tolerance for a given commodity from a list of high use
insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides. A complete description of the
general approach taken to assess inert ingredient risks in the absence
of residue data is contained in the memorandum entitled ``Alkyl Amines
Polyalkoxylates (Cluster 4): Acute and Chronic Aggregate (Food and
Drinking Water) Dietary Exposure and Risk Assessments for the Inerts,''
(D361707, S. Piper, 2/25/09) and can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0738.
Generally, in the dietary exposure assessments for inert
ingredients, the Agency assumes that the residue level of the inert
ingredient would be no higher than the highest tolerance for a given
commodity. Implicit in this assumption is that there would be similar
rates of degradation (if any) between the active and inert ingredient
and that the concentration of inert ingredient in the scenarios leading
to these highest levels of tolerances would be no higher than the
concentration of the active ingredient.
The Agency believes the assumptions used to estimate dietary
exposures lead to an extremely conservative assessment of dietary risk
due to a series of compounded conservatisms. First, assuming that the
level of residue for an inert ingredient is equal to the level of
residue for the active ingredient will overstate exposure. The
concentrations of active ingredient in agricultural products are
generally at least 50 percent of the product and often can be much
higher. However, in assessing this petition request, the Agency assumed
that a product consisted of 10% percent 10ETO and 20ETO. Further,
pesticide products rarely have a single inert ingredient; rather there
is generally a combination of different inert ingredients used which
additionally reduces the concentration of any single inert ingredient
in the pesticide product in relation to that of the active ingredient.
Second, the conservatism of this methodology is compounded by EPA's
decision to assume that, for each commodity, the active ingredient
which will serve as a guide to the potential level of inert ingredient
residues is the active ingredient with the highest tolerance level.
This assumption overstates residue values because it would be highly
unlikely, given the high number of inert ingredients, that a single
inert ingredient or class of ingredients would be present at the level
of the active ingredient in the highest tolerance for every commodity.
Finally, a third compounding conservatism is EPA's assumption that
all foods contain the inert ingredient at the highest tolerance level.
In other words, EPA assumed 100 percent of all foods are treated with
the inert ingredient at the rate and manner necessary to produce the
highest residue legally possible for an active ingredient. In summary,
EPA chose a very conservative method for estimating what level of inert
residue could be on food, then used this methodology to choose the
highest possible residue that could be found on food and assumed that
all food contained this residue. No consideration was given to
potential degradation between harvest and consumption even though
monitoring data shows that tolerance level residues are typically one
to two orders of magnitude higher than actual residues in food when
distributed in commerce.
Accordingly, although sufficient information to quantify actual
residue levels in food is not available, this conservative assumption
will lead to a significant exaggeration of actual exposures. EPA does
not believe that this approach underestimates exposure in the absence
of residue data.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. For the purpose of the
screening level dietary risk assessment to support this request for an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for 10ETO and 20ETO, a
conservative drinking water concentration value of 100 ppb based on
screening level modeling was used to assess the contribution to
drinking water for the chronic dietary risk assessments for parent
compound. These values were directly entered into the dietary exposure
model.
3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary
exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming
pools, for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control,
termiticides, flea and tick control on pets, and hard surface
disinfection on walls, floors, tables).
20ETO and 10ETO may be used as an inert ingredient in pesticide
products that are registered for specific uses that may result in
residential exposure, such as pesticides used in and around the home.
For residential handlers, the Agency assumed handlers may receive
short-term dermal and inhalation exposure to 20ETO and 10ETO from
formulations containing the inert ingredient in outdoor and indoor
scenarios. Short- and intermediate-term dermal exposures were not
quantitated since no systemic toxicity is observed in dermal toxicity
studies. Also, intermediate- and long-term inhalation exposures are not
expected because applications are not expected to occur daily or for
more than 30 days. Therefore, only short-term inhalation exposures were
estimated and were based on the NOAEL of 43.39 mg/kg/day and a LOC for
an MOE of 100. The short-term residential handler MOE is 36000, which
is not a risk of concern because EPA considers MOEs of 100 or less to
be of concern. The Agency also considered intermediate-term incidental
oral exposures to children due to residential exposure associated with
contact with treated surfaces (dermal and hand-to-mouth exposures). The
MOE is 1964 for children, which is not a risk of concern because EPA
considers MOEs of 100 or less to be of concern.
As introduced above, 10ETO and 20ETO are expected to biodegrade
into TEA and fatty acids, tall oil. Residential exposure to TEA may
occur from existing pesticide uses as well as from non-pesticide
products that may be used in and around the home, such as cosmetics.
Dermal contact is the primary route of exposure to TEA in cosmetics.
However, a dermal endpoint of concern was not identified, and therefore
a quantitative dermal exposure assessment is not necessary. TEA can be
used in products that may be sprayed, however, so there is the
potential for inhalation exposure. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR)
Expert Panel has noted that 95% to 99% of TEA particles produced in
cosmetic aerosols are not respirable. This assumption, coupled with the
small actual exposure in the breathing zone and the concentrations at
which TEA is used, suggests that inhalation would not be a significant
route of exposure that might lead to local respiratory or systemic
toxic effects (Fiume et. al., 2013). Small amounts of TEA may also be
ingested (oral exposure) from lipsticks as they are reported to
potentially contain up to 1% TEA. However, any contribution to the
estimated oral pesticide exposure resulting from cosmetic uses is
likely to
[[Page 10987]]
be insignificant in comparison to the estimates for exposure from the
pesticide use.
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 20ETO and 10ETO to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and 20ETO and 10ETO do not appear
to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
20ETO and 10ETO do not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
The Agency has concluded that there is reliable data to determine
that infants and children will be safe if the FQPA SF of 10x is reduced
to 1X for the chronic dietary assessment for the following reasons. The
toxicity database for 20ETO and 10ETO contains developmental, 2-
generation reproduction, combined reproduction/developmental toxicity
and mutagenicity studies. There is no indication of immunotoxicity or
neurotoxicity in the available studies; therefore, there is no need to
require an immunotoxicity or neurotoxicity study. Additionally, no
fetal susceptibility or reproduction toxicity was observed in the
available studies. Based on the adequacy of the toxicity database, the
conservative nature of the exposure assessment and the lack of concern
for prenatal and postnatal sensitivity, the Agency has concluded that
there is reliable data to determine that infants and children will be
safe if the FQPA SF of 10x is reduced to 1X.
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,
20ETO and 10ETO 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
20ETO and 10ETO from food and water will utilize 32.6% of the cPAD for
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest
exposure.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure generally takes
into account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to
food and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
20ETO and 10ETO may be used as inert ingredients in pesticide
products that could result in short-term residential exposure. The
Agency has determined that it is not appropriate to aggregate chronic
exposure through food and water with short-term residential exposures
to 20ETO and 10ETO since toxicological effects were different depending
on the route of exposure.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined short-term residential
exposures result in aggregate MOEs of 36000 for adult males and
females. Because EPA's level of concern for 20ETO and 10ETO is an MOE
of 100 or below, this MOE is 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).
20ETO and 10ETO may be used as inert ingredients in pesticide
products that could result in intermediate-term residential exposure,
and the Agency has determined that it is not appropriate to aggregate
chronic exposure through food and water with intermediate-term
residential exposures to 20ETO and 10ETO since toxicological effects
were different depending on the route of exposure.
Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for
intermediate-term exposures, EPA has concluded that the combined
intermediate-term food, water, and residential exposures result in an
aggregate MOE of 1964 for children. Children's residential exposure
includes total exposures associated with contact with treated surfaces
(dermal and hand-to-mouth exposures). Because EPA's level of concern
for children's residential exposure (incidental oral exposure) to 20ETO
and 10ETO is an MOE of 100 or below, this MOE is not of concern.
5. Long-term risk. Long-term aggregate exposure takes into account
long-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background exposure level).
Long-term residential exposures are not expected from the use of
20ETO and 10ETO in pesticides used in and around the home. Therefore,
long-term aggregate exposure considers chronic food and water. The MOE
is 10833 based on the cPAD of 0.455 mg/kg/day. As the level of concern
is for an MOE that is lower than 1000, this MOE is not of concern.
TEA, a metabolite of 10ETO and 20ETO, may be used as inert
ingredients in non-pesticide products that could result in long-term
residential exposure. Based on the exposure assumptions described in
unit IV. C. 3, the Agency anticipates that the contribution to the
estimated oral non-pesticide exposure due to its use in cosmetics is
likely to be insignificant in comparison to the estimates for exposure
from the pesticide use. Therefore, the Agency believes the assessments
of aggregate exposures due to pesticide uses more than adequately
protect for exposure from uses in cosmetics products.
6. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
tumors in the carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice and the lack of
mutagenicity, 20ETO and 10ETO are not expected to pose a cancer risk to
humans.
7. Determination of safety. Taking into consideration all available
[[Page 10988]]
information on 20ETO and 10ETO, EPA concludes that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general
population, including infants and children, from aggregate exposure to
20ETO and 10ETO residues.
V. Other Considerations
Analytical Enforcement Methodology
An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is not establishing a numerical tolerance for residues of
20ETO and 10ETO in or on any food commodities. EPA is establishing a
limitation on the amount of 20ETO and 10ETO that may be used in
pesticide formulations. This limitation will be enforced through the
pesticide registration process under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (``FIFRA''), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. EPA
will not register any pesticide formulation for food use that exceeds
10% in the final pesticide formulations for indoor and outdoor
residential use.
VI. Conclusions
Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established for residues of 20ETO (CAS Reg No. 68605-38-9) and 10ETO
(CAS Reg No. 2464873-19-4) when used as inert ingredients (surfactant)
in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops pre- and post-
harvest under 40 CFR 180.910.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes a tolerance exemption 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). 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), EPA seeks to
achieve environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful
involvement of any group, including minority and/or low-income
populations, in the development, implementation, and enforcement of
environmental laws, regulations, and policies. As such, to the extent
that information is publicly available or was submitted in comments to
EPA, the Agency considered whether groups or segments of the
population, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticide
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
Tribal Governments, on the relationship between the National Government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VIII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 22, 2022.
Marietta Echeverria,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending
40 CFR part 180 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. In Sec. 180.910, amend Table 1 to 180.910 by adding in alphabetical
order the inert ingredients ``Fatty acids, tall-oil, esters with
triethanolamine, ethoxylated'' and ``Fatty acids, C8-18 and
C18-unsatd., esters with polyethylene glycol ether with
triethanolamine (3:1)'' to reads as follows:
Sec. 180.910 Inert ingredients used pre- and post-harvest; exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance.
* * * * *
[[Page 10989]]
Table 1 to 180.910
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inert ingredients Limits (%) Uses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fatty acids, tall-oil, esters with triethanolamine, 10 Surfactant.
ethoxylated (CAS Reg. No. 68605-38-9).
Fatty acids, C8 18 and C18-unsatd., esters with 10 Surfactant.
polyethylene glycol ether with triethanolamine (3:1) (CAS
Reg. No. 2464873-19-4).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2022-04123 Filed 2-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P