Dodine; Pesticide Tolerances, 86268-86273 [2023-27254]
Download as PDF
86268
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 13, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601–612) applies to rules that
are subject to notice and comment
under section 553(b) of the APA or other
laws. As noted in the above section
regarding the applicability of the APA,
DEA determined that there was good
cause to exempt this final rule from
notice and comment. Consequently, the
RFA does not apply.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This action does not impose a new
collection of information requirement
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995. 44 U.S.C. 3501–3521. This action
would not impose recordkeeping or
reporting requirements on State or local
governments, individuals, businesses, or
organizations. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
In accordance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995,
2 U.S.C. 1532, DEA has determined that
this action would not result in any
Federal mandate that may result ‘‘in the
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal
Governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any
1 year.’’ Therefore, neither a Small
Government Agency Plan nor any other
action is required under UMRA of 1995.
DEA. This administrative process in no
way alters the legal effect of this
document upon publication in the
Federal Register.
Scott Brinks,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Drug
Enforcement Administration.
Congressional Review Act
This rule is not a major rule as
defined by the Congressional Review
Act (CRA), 5 U.S.C. 804. However,
pursuant to the CRA, DEA is submitting
a copy of this rule to both Houses of
Congress and to the Comptroller
General.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1308
Signing Authority
This document of the Drug
Enforcement Administration was signed
on December 7, 2023, by Administrator
Anne Milgram. That document with the
original signature and date is
maintained by DEA. For administrative
purposes only, and in compliance with
requirements of the Office of the Federal
Register, the undersigned DEA Federal
Register Liaison Officer has been
authorized to sign and submit the
document in electronic format for
publication, as an official document of
PART 1308—SCHEDULES OF
CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES
Administrative practice and
procedure, Drug traffic control,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set out above, DEA
amends 21 CFR part 1308 as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 1308
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b),
956(b), unless otherwise noted.
2. Amend § 1308.11 by adding new
paragraphs (d)(102) to (104) to read as
follows:
■
§ 1308.11
*
Schedule I.
*
*
(d) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(102) N-(1-amino-3,3-dimethyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-butyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (other name: ADB–BUTINACA) ............................
(103) 4-methyl-1-phenyl-2-(pyrrolidin-1-yl)pentan-1-one (other names: a-PiHP; alpha-PiHP) ....................................................................
(104) 2-(methylamino)-1-(3-methylphenyl)propan-1-one (other names: 3–MMC; 3-methylmethcathinone) ...............................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
This regulation is effective
December 13, 2023. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 12, 2024, and
must be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
Dodine; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of dodine in or
on Fruit, pome, group 11–10; Fruit,
stone, group 12–12; Nut, tree, group 14–
12; and Olive, with pit. Interregional
Research Project Number 4 (IR–4)
requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
SUMMARY:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0657, 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 and the OPP
Docket is (202) 566–1744. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
ADDRESSES:
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0657; FRL–11567–01–
OCSPP]
15:50 Dec 12, 2023
*
DATES:
[FR Doc. 2023–27292 Filed 12–12–23; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
7027
7551
1259
*
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Charles Smith, Director, Registration
Division (7505T), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; main
telephone number: (202) 566–1030;
email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
E:\FR\FM\13DER1.SGM
13DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 13, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
In the Federal Register of April 28,
2022 (87 FR 25178) (FRL–9410–12–
OCSPP), 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 1E8935) by
IR–4, North Carolina State University,
1730 Varsity Drive, Venture IV, Suite
210, Raleigh, NC 27606. The petition
requested that 40 CFR part 180 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of dodine in or on the raw
agricultural commodities: Fruit, pome,
group 11–10 at 5 parts per million
(ppm); Fruit, stone, group 12–12 at 5
ppm; Nut, tree, group 14–12 at 0.3 ppm;
and Olive, with pit at 0.3 ppm.
The petition also requested to remove
the following established dodine
tolerances in or on: Apple at 5.0 ppm;
Fruit, stone, crop group 12 at 5.0 ppm;
Nuts, tree, crop group 14 at 0.3 ppm;
and Pear at 5.0 ppm.
That document referenced a summary
of the petition, which is available in the
docket, https://www.regulations.gov.
Two comments were received in
response to the notice. EPA’s response
to these comments can be found in
section IV.D.
Based upon review of the data
supporting the petition and in
accordance with its authority under
FFDCA section 408(d)(4)(A)(i), EPA is
modifying the level at which one of the
tolerances is being established. For
details, see Unit IV.C.
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Federal Register Office’s e-CFR site
at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a(g), 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–2021–0657 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 12, 2024. 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–
2021–0657, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Do not submit electronically
any information you consider to be CBI
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/where-sendcomments-epa-dockets.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:50 Dec 12, 2023
Jkt 262001
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerances
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
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
86269
aggregate exposure to the pesticide
chemical residue. . . .’’
Consistent with FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified
therein, 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 dodine
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with dodine 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.
Because of toxicological equivalency,
the Agency must also consider any
applicable contribution from the
antimicrobial pesticide
dodecylguanidine hydrochloride (DGH).
There are no direct food uses
established for DGH, but there are
dietary exposures from uses on paper
and paperboard and in drinking water
from industrial uses.
A definitive target organ was not
identified for dodine or DGH in the
available toxicology data, with the most
common effects being decreases in body
weight and/or body weight gain. When
allometric scaling is used to adjust to a
human equivalent dosage, the dog was
found to be the most sensitive species
for this endpoint.
There was no evidence of increased
qualitative or quantitative susceptibility
in pups or fetuses as compared to adults
based on rat and rabbit developmental
studies and a rat multi-generation
reproduction study. In rat and rabbit
prenatal developmental studies, there
was no toxicity identified in the fetuses
up to the highest dose tested. In the 2generation reproduction study,
decreases in body weight and food
consumption were seen in pups at the
same dose at which maternal toxicity
(decreases in body weight, body weight
gain, and food consumption) was
observed. In addition, there was no
evidence of neurotoxicity across the
database. Dodine is classified as ‘‘Not
Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by dodine and DGH as
well as the no-observed-adverse-effectlevels (NOAELs) and the lowest-
E:\FR\FM\13DER1.SGM
13DER1
86270
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 13, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
observed-adverse-effect-levels (LOAELs)
from the toxicity studies can be found
in Appendix A of the document titled
‘‘Dodine. Risk Assessment for the
Proposed Use on Olives; Crop Group
Expansions to Fruit Pome Group 11–10;
and Crop Group Conversions to Stone
Fruit Group 12–12 and Tree Nut Group
14–12 and Updated Registration Review
Human Health Draft Risk Assessment’’
(hereafter, the Dodine Human Health
Risk Assessment), in docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0657 at https://
www.regulations.gov.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
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/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks.
A summary of the Toxicological
Points of Departure/Levels of Concern
for dodine used for human health risk
assessment can be found in Table
4.5.3.1 of the Dodine Human Health
Risk Assessment, in docket ID number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0657 at https://
www.regulations.gov.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to dodine, EPA considered
exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing
tolerances for dodine in 40 CFR
180.172. While there are no direct food
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:50 Dec 12, 2023
Jkt 262001
uses established for DGH, EPA
considered indirect dietary exposure
from use of DGH on paper and
paperboard in contact with food. EPA
assessed dietary exposures from dodine
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 dodine or DGH; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure
assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. Chronic
aggregate dietary exposure and risk
assessments were conducted using the
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
software with the Food Commodity
Intake Database (DEEM–FCID) Version
4.02. This software uses 2005–2010 food
consumption data from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s)
National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America, (NHANES/WWEIA). The
chronic analysis incorporated mean
field trial residues for most commodities
and tolerance-level residues for the
remaining commodities. Percent crop
treated (PCT) data were used for some
crops, and 100 PCT was assumed for all
other crops. The analyses incorporated
default processing factors for processed
commodities where no processing study
was conducted. For apple juice and
olive oil, empirical processing factors of
0.1X were used.
Indirect dietary exposure has the
potential to occur from the use of DGH
as a material preservative in paper and
paperboard intended for use in contact
with food, with a retention rate of up to
0.045% by weight of the paper or
paperboard. This use is considered
protective of other indirect food uses,
including paper slimicides, materials
preservative of the outermost ply of
multiwalled paper bags containing dry
food, adhesives and polymers, and
sapstain on fruit and vegetable
containers.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data
summarized in the Dodine Human
Health Risk Assessment, EPA has
concluded that dodine is not likely pose
a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a
dietary exposure assessment for the
purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 annual average percent crop
treated estimates used in the chronic
dietary risk assessment are as follows:
almonds: 2.5%; apples: 5%; cherries:
20%; nectarines: 1%; peaches: 1%;
peanuts: 2.5%; pears: 2.5%; pecans:
20%; and walnuts: 1%. 100 PCT was
assumed for all other crops.
In most cases, EPA uses available data
from United States Department of
Agriculture/National Agricultural
Statistics Service (USDA/NASS),
proprietary market surveys, and
California Department of Pesticide
Regulation (CalDPR) Pesticide Use
Reporting (PUR) for the chemical/crop
combination for the most recent 10
years. EPA uses an average PCT for
chronic dietary risk analysis and a
maximum PCT for acute dietary risk
analysis. The average PCT figure for
each existing use is derived by
combining available public and private
market survey data for that use,
averaging across all observations, and
rounding to the nearest 5%, except for
those situations in which the average
PCT is less than 1% or less than 2.5%
as the average PCT value, respectively.
In those cases, the Agency would use
E:\FR\FM\13DER1.SGM
13DER1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 13, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
1% or 2.5% as the average PCT value,
respectively. The maximum PCT figure
is the highest observed maximum value
reported within the most recent 10 years
of available public and private market
survey data for the existing use and
rounded up to the nearest multiple of
5%, except where the maximum PCT is
less than 2.5%, in which case, the
Agency uses 2.5% as the maximum
PCT.
The Agency believes that Conditions
a, b, and c discussed above 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 dodine 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 dodine in drinking water. Further
information regarding EPA drinking
water models used in pesticide
exposure assessment can be found at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-scienceand-assessing-pesticide-risks/modelspesticide-risk-assessment.
A chronic surface water estimated
drinking water concentration (EDWC) of
1.59 parts per billion (ppb) determined
with the FQPA Index Reservoir
Screening Tool (FIRST) was used for
dietary assessment. Because dodine has
a high partition coefficient, is relatively
non-persistent in aerobic soils, and has
a lack of transport in the field, leaching
to groundwater is not expected to be a
major route of dissipation.
Drinking water exposure to DGH has
the potential to occur when drinking
water intakes are downstream from
cooling towers, paper mills, and/or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:50 Dec 12, 2023
Jkt 262001
other water systems using DGH as a
slimicide. Drinking water exposure is
expected to be minimal from other
currently registered uses of DGH such as
materials preservation of leather and
textiles. The highest chronic EDWC
from the modeled use patterns is 22 mg
ai/L from once-through cooling towers
using an application rate of 6.0 ppm
DGH. This drinking water concentration
is considered protective of the other
uses.
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
no current or proposed conventional or
antimicrobial residential uses of dodine
or DGH.
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.’’
Unlike other pesticides for which EPA
has followed a cumulative risk approach
based on a common mechanism of
toxicity, EPA has not made a common
mechanism of toxicity finding as to
dodine and any other substances and
dodine does not appear to produce a
toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
action, therefore, EPA has not assumed
that dodine has a common mechanism
of toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA’s efforts to
determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to
evaluate the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/cumulativeassessment-risk-pesticides.
EPA notes that dodine and DGH are
salts of the same chemical. They
dissociate similarly and are considered
toxicologically equivalent, as opposed
to being separate chemicals that share a
common mechanism of toxicity.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
86271
and exposure unless EPA determines
based on reliable data that a different
margin of safety will be safe for infants
and children. This additional margin of
safety is commonly referred to as the
Food Quality Protection Act safety
factor. In applying this provision, EPA
either retains the default value of 10X,
or uses a different additional safety
factor when reliable data available to
EPA support the choice of a different
factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There is no evidence of susceptibility
following in utero and/or postnatal
exposure in the developmental toxicity
studies in rats or rabbits, nor in the 2generation rat reproduction study.
3. Conclusion. The FQPA safety factor
is reduced to 1X for all exposure
scenarios except for inhalation
exposure. The Agency is retaining a 10X
database uncertainty factor (UFDB) to
assess risk to dodine inhalation
scenarios to account for the lack of an
acceptable inhalation toxicity study.
i. Except for an acceptable inhalation
toxicity study, the toxicology database
for dodine and DGH is complete and
adequate to assess potential risk to
infants and children. The database
contains the following toxicity studies:
prenatal developmental studies (rats
and rabbits); and a reproduction study
in rats.
ii. Neurotoxicity studies are not
available for dodine or DGH. Clinical
signs (excessive salivation and hunched
posture/hypoactivity) were observed in
chronic studies of dodine in rats and
mice but were not dose-related or
statistically significant. Excessive
salivation in dogs after dodine (capsule)
exposure showed a treatment-related
dose response; however, it was not
consistent with a neurological adverse
effect since it was seen prior to dosing
and was a persistent finding throughout
the study. It is possible that the
excessive salivation was a result of the
irritant properties of dodine. In
addition, no evidence of neuropathology
was observed in the available studies.
The Hazard and Science Policy Council
(HASPOC) recommended waiving the
requirement for the acute and
subchronic neurotoxicity studies, based
on (1) the low acute oral toxicity of
dodine (Toxicity Category III); (2) the
lack of neurotoxicity in the dodine
toxicity database; and (3) no
neurotoxicity concerns for structurally
related compounds to dodine.
iii. Based on the available dodine and
DGH toxicity studies, there was no
evidence of increased susceptibility
(quantitative or qualitative) in pups or
fetuses as compared to adults based on
rat and rabbit developmental studies
E:\FR\FM\13DER1.SGM
13DER1
86272
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 13, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
and a rat multi-generation reproduction
study. In rat and rabbit prenatal
developmental studies, there was no
toxicity identified in the fetuses up to
the highest dose tested. In the 2generation reproduction study,
decreases in body weight and food
consumption were seen in pups at the
same dose at which maternal toxicity
(decreases in body weight, body weight
gain, and food consumption) was
observed.
iv. The exposure databases are
sufficient to determine the nature and
magnitude of the residue in food and
drinking water. The dodine residue
chemistry database is complete. The
exposure assessment for drinking water
provides a conservative approach for
estimating dodine and DGH
concentrations from drinking water
sources, and thus is unlikely to
underestimate exposure. The food and
drinking water dietary exposure
analyses are unlikely to underestimate
exposure as they incorporated
conservative assumptions for dodine
and DGH.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing dietary (food and
drinking water) exposure estimates to
the acute population-adjusted dose
(aPAD) and chronic population-adjusted
dose (cPAD). Short- intermediate- and
chronic-term risks are evaluated by
comparing the estimated total food,
water, and residential exposure to the
appropriate points of departure to
ensure that an adequate margin of
exposure (MOE) exists.
1. Acute risk. No adverse effect
resulting from a single oral exposure
was identified and no acute dietary
endpoint was selected. Therefore,
dodine is not expected to pose an acute
risk.
2. Chronic risk. The chronic dietary
risk assessment includes only food and
water exposure from dodine and DGH.
Chronic dietary risks from dodine (food
and drinking water) are below the
Agency’s level of concern of 100% of
the cPAD; they are 6.1% of the cPAD for
all infants less than 1 year old, the
group with the highest exposure.
Chronic dietary risks from DGH (food
and water) are below the Agency’s level
of concern of 100% of the cPAD; they
are 95% of the cPAD for children 1 to
2 years old, the group with the highest
exposure.
There are no chronic nonoccupational exposures, so the aggregate
chronic risk assessment is equal to the
chronic dietary exposure analysis of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:50 Dec 12, 2023
Jkt 262001
food and drinking water. The chronic
aggregate assessment includes: (1) food
only contributions from agricultural
uses of dodine, including the proposed
uses; (2) food only contributions from
DGH in paper and paperboard intended
for use in contact with food; and (3)
drinking water only contributions from
DGH in water from cooling tower uses,
which is protective of drinking water
exposures resulting from conventional
agricultural uses of dodine. This
aggregate assessment resulted in risk
estimates that are below the Agency’s
level of concern of 100% of the cPAD;
they are 98% of the cPAD for children
1 to 2 years old, the group with the
highest exposure, which is considered
protective for all other population
subgroups.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk.
Short- and intermediate-term adverse
effects were identified; however, dodine
is not registered for any use patterns
that would result in short- and/or
intermediate-term residential exposure.
Short- and intermediate-term risk is
assessed based on short- and
intermediate-term residential exposure
plus chronic dietary exposure. Because
there is no short-or intermediate-term
residential exposure and chronic dietary
exposure has already been assessed
under the appropriately protective
cPAD (which is at least as protective as
the POD used to assess short-term risk),
no further assessment of short- or
intermediate-term risk is necessary, and
EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk
assessment for evaluating short- and
intermediate-term risk for dodine.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. There was equivocal
evidence of carcinogenicity in rat and
mouse carcinogenicity studies; however,
an evaluation of the carcinogenic
potential of dodine was performed
which concluded that the weight of
evidence indicates that dodine and DGH
are ‘‘Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to
Humans.’’ Therefore, dodine and DGH
are not expected to pose a cancer risk
to humans.
5. Determination of safety. Therefore,
based on the risk assessments and
information described above, EPA
concludes there is a reasonable certainty
that no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children,
from aggregate exposure to dodine
residues. More detailed information on
this action can be found in the Dodine
Human Health Risk Assessment in
docket ID EPA–HQ–OPP–2021–0657.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Method 45137, which is entitled
‘‘Dodine: Analytical Method for Dodine
in Fruit,’’ is available for the
enforcement of tolerances of dodine in/
on plant commodities. This method is a
Gas Chromatograph/Mass Selective
Detection (GC/MSD) procedure based on
extracting dodine from fruit by
homogenization with methanol. The
method may be requested from: Chief,
Analytical Chemistry Branch,
Environmental Science Center, 701
Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350;
telephone number: (410) 305–2905;
email address: residuemethods@
epa.gov.
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA
seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with
international standards whenever
possible, consistent with U.S. food
safety standards and agricultural
practices. EPA considers the
international maximum residue limits
(MRLs) established by the Codex
Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as
required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4).
The Codex Alimentarius is a joint
United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health
Organization food standards program,
and it is recognized as an international
food safety standards-setting
organization in trade agreements to
which the United States is a party. EPA
may establish a tolerance that is
different from a Codex MRL; however,
FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that
EPA explain the reasons for departing
from the Codex level.
Codex has established MRLs for
residues of dodine in or on apple at 5
ppm; pear at 5 ppm; cherry at 3 ppm;
nectarine at 5 ppm; and peach at 5 ppm.
The U.S. tolerances are harmonized
with the corresponding Codex MRLs
except for cherry. The cherry field trial
data show that residues from the
domestic labeled use of dodine may
exceed the 3 ppm Codex cherry MRL.
Therefore, it is not possible to
harmonize with the Codex MRL based
on the U.S. application pattern.
C. Revisions to Tolerances
The Agency is establishing the
tolerance level for ‘‘olive, with pit’’ at
0.4 ppm instead of the requested level
of 0.3 ppm. Two of the 2011 olive trials
from Greece were determined to be
replicates, and this determination
resulted in a higher calculated
maximum residue limit (MRL) than the
petitioner requested.
E:\FR\FM\13DER1.SGM
13DER1
86273
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 13, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
D. Response to Comments
Two comments were received in
response to the Notice of Filing by the
same commenter. The commenter stated
in part that ‘‘we need to stop all
chemical use on vegetables’’ and that
‘‘toxic in your body kill you.’’ Although
the Agency recognizes that some
individuals believe that pesticides
should be banned on agricultural crops,
the existing legal framework provided
by section 408 of the FFDCA authorizes
EPA to establish tolerances when it
determines that the tolerances are safe.
Upon consideration of the validity,
completeness, and reliability of the
available data as well as other factors
the FFDCA requires EPA to consider,
EPA has determined that the dodine
tolerances are safe. The commenter has
provided no information indicating that
a safety determination cannot be
supported.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established
for residues of dodine in or on Fruit,
pome, group 11–10 at 5 ppm; Fruit,
stone, group 12–12 at 5 ppm; Nut, tree,
group 14–12 at 0.3 ppm; and Olive, with
pit at 0.4 ppm.
Additionally, the following existing
tolerances are removed as unnecessary:
Apple; Fruit, stone, crop group 12; Nut,
tree, crop group 14; and Pear.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
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 to
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:50 Dec 12, 2023
Jkt 262001
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
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: December 7, 2023.
Charles Smith,
Director, Registration Division, 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:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
■
2. Revise § 180.172 to read as follows:
§ 180.172
Dodine; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are
established for residues of the fungicide
dodine, including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the commodities in
table1 to this paragraph (a). Compliance
with the tolerance levels specified in
table1 is to be determined by measuring
only dodine, N-dodecylguanidine
acetate; in or on the following
commodities.
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)
Commodity
Almond, hull ............................
Apple, wet pomace .................
Banana ...................................
Fruit, pome, group 11–10 .......
Fruit, stone, group 12–12 .......
Nut, tree, group 14–12 ...........
Olive, with pit ..........................
Peanut ....................................
Strawberry ..............................
Parts
per million
30.0
15.0
0.50
5
5
0.3
0.4
0.013
5.0
(b)–(d) [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2023–27254 Filed 12–12–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\13DER1.SGM
13DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 13, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 86268-86273]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27254]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0657; FRL-11567-01-OCSPP]
Dodine; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of dodine
in or on Fruit, pome, group 11-10; Fruit, stone, group 12-12; Nut,
tree, group 14-12; and Olive, with pit. Interregional Research Project
Number 4 (IR-4) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective December 13, 2023. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 12, 2024,
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-2021-0657, 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 and the OPP Docket is (202) 566-1744. Please review the
visitor instructions and additional information about the docket
available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Smith, Director, Registration
Division (7505T), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; main telephone number: (202) 566-1030; 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).
[[Page 86269]]
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 Federal Register
Office'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(g), 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-2021-0657 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 12, 2024. 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-2021-0657, by one of
the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/where-send-comments-epa-dockets.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerances
In the Federal Register of April 28, 2022 (87 FR 25178) (FRL-9410-
12-OCSPP), 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
1E8935) by IR-4, North Carolina State University, 1730 Varsity Drive,
Venture IV, Suite 210, Raleigh, NC 27606. The petition requested that
40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of
dodine in or on the raw agricultural commodities: Fruit, pome, group
11-10 at 5 parts per million (ppm); Fruit, stone, group 12-12 at 5 ppm;
Nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.3 ppm; and Olive, with pit at 0.3 ppm.
The petition also requested to remove the following established
dodine tolerances in or on: Apple at 5.0 ppm; Fruit, stone, crop group
12 at 5.0 ppm; Nuts, tree, crop group 14 at 0.3 ppm; and Pear at 5.0
ppm.
That document referenced a summary of the petition, which is
available in the docket, https://www.regulations.gov. Two comments were
received in response to the notice. EPA's response to these comments
can be found in section IV.D.
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition and in
accordance with its authority under FFDCA section 408(d)(4)(A)(i), EPA
is modifying the level at which one of the tolerances is being
established. For details, see Unit IV.C.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings but does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . .
.''
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors
specified therein, 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 dodine including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures
and risks associated with dodine 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.
Because of toxicological equivalency, the Agency must also consider
any applicable contribution from the antimicrobial pesticide
dodecylguanidine hydrochloride (DGH). There are no direct food uses
established for DGH, but there are dietary exposures from uses on paper
and paperboard and in drinking water from industrial uses.
A definitive target organ was not identified for dodine or DGH in
the available toxicology data, with the most common effects being
decreases in body weight and/or body weight gain. When allometric
scaling is used to adjust to a human equivalent dosage, the dog was
found to be the most sensitive species for this endpoint.
There was no evidence of increased qualitative or quantitative
susceptibility in pups or fetuses as compared to adults based on rat
and rabbit developmental studies and a rat multi-generation
reproduction study. In rat and rabbit prenatal developmental studies,
there was no toxicity identified in the fetuses up to the highest dose
tested. In the 2-generation reproduction study, decreases in body
weight and food consumption were seen in pups at the same dose at which
maternal toxicity (decreases in body weight, body weight gain, and food
consumption) was observed. In addition, there was no evidence of
neurotoxicity across the database. Dodine is classified as ``Not Likely
to be Carcinogenic to Humans''.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by dodine and DGH as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-levels (NOAELs) and the lowest-
[[Page 86270]]
observed-adverse-effect-levels (LOAELs) from the toxicity studies can
be found in Appendix A of the document titled ``Dodine. Risk Assessment
for the Proposed Use on Olives; Crop Group Expansions to Fruit Pome
Group 11-10; and Crop Group Conversions to Stone Fruit Group 12-12 and
Tree Nut Group 14-12 and Updated Registration Review Human Health Draft
Risk Assessment'' (hereafter, the Dodine Human Health Risk Assessment),
in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0657 at https://www.regulations.gov.
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/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks.
A summary of the Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of
Concern for dodine used for human health risk assessment can be found
in Table 4.5.3.1 of the Dodine Human Health Risk Assessment, in docket
ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0657 at https://www.regulations.gov.
C. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to dodine, EPA considered exposure under the petitioned-for
tolerances as well as all existing tolerances for dodine in 40 CFR
180.172. While there are no direct food uses established for DGH, EPA
considered indirect dietary exposure from use of DGH on paper and
paperboard in contact with food. EPA assessed dietary exposures from
dodine 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 dodine or DGH; therefore, a
quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ii. Chronic exposure. Chronic aggregate dietary exposure and risk
assessments were conducted using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
software with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID) Version
4.02. This software uses 2005-2010 food consumption data from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). The chronic
analysis incorporated mean field trial residues for most commodities
and tolerance-level residues for the remaining commodities. Percent
crop treated (PCT) data were used for some crops, and 100 PCT was
assumed for all other crops. The analyses incorporated default
processing factors for processed commodities where no processing study
was conducted. For apple juice and olive oil, empirical processing
factors of 0.1X were used.
Indirect dietary exposure has the potential to occur from the use
of DGH as a material preservative in paper and paperboard intended for
use in contact with food, with a retention rate of up to 0.045% by
weight of the paper or paperboard. This use is considered protective of
other indirect food uses, including paper slimicides, materials
preservative of the outermost ply of multiwalled paper bags containing
dry food, adhesives and polymers, and sapstain on fruit and vegetable
containers.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in the Dodine Human
Health Risk Assessment, EPA has concluded that dodine is not likely
pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment
for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is unnecessary.
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 annual average percent crop treated estimates used in the
chronic dietary risk assessment are as follows: almonds: 2.5%; apples:
5%; cherries: 20%; nectarines: 1%; peaches: 1%; peanuts: 2.5%; pears:
2.5%; pecans: 20%; and walnuts: 1%. 100 PCT was assumed for all other
crops.
In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States
Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service
(USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and California Department of
Pesticide Regulation (CalDPR) Pesticide Use Reporting (PUR) for the
chemical/crop combination for the most recent 10 years. EPA uses an
average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis and a maximum PCT for
acute dietary risk analysis. The average PCT figure for each existing
use is derived by combining available public and private market survey
data for that use, averaging across all observations, and rounding to
the nearest 5%, except for those situations in which the average PCT is
less than 1% or less than 2.5% as the average PCT value, respectively.
In those cases, the Agency would use
[[Page 86271]]
1% or 2.5% as the average PCT value, respectively. The maximum PCT
figure is the highest observed maximum value reported within the most
recent 10 years of available public and private market survey data for
the existing use and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%, except
where the maximum PCT is less than 2.5%, in which case, the Agency uses
2.5% as the maximum PCT.
The Agency believes that Conditions a, b, and c discussed above
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
dodine 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 dodine in drinking water. Further information regarding
EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/models-pesticide-risk-assessment.
A chronic surface water estimated drinking water concentration
(EDWC) of 1.59 parts per billion (ppb) determined with the FQPA Index
Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) was used for dietary assessment.
Because dodine has a high partition coefficient, is relatively non-
persistent in aerobic soils, and has a lack of transport in the field,
leaching to groundwater is not expected to be a major route of
dissipation.
Drinking water exposure to DGH has the potential to occur when
drinking water intakes are downstream from cooling towers, paper mills,
and/or other water systems using DGH as a slimicide. Drinking water
exposure is expected to be minimal from other currently registered uses
of DGH such as materials preservation of leather and textiles. The
highest chronic EDWC from the modeled use patterns is 22 [mu]g ai/L
from once-through cooling towers using an application rate of 6.0 ppm
DGH. This drinking water concentration is considered protective of the
other uses.
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 no current
or proposed conventional or antimicrobial residential uses of dodine or
DGH.
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.''
Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative
risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to dodine and any other
substances and dodine does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this action,
therefore, EPA has not assumed that dodine has a common mechanism of
toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts
to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to
evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at
https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.
EPA notes that dodine and DGH are salts of the same chemical. They
dissociate similarly and are considered toxicologically equivalent, as
opposed to being separate chemicals that share a common mechanism of
toxicity.
D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children
1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the Food Quality
Protection Act safety factor. In applying this provision, EPA either
retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety
factor when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a
different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no evidence of
susceptibility following in utero and/or postnatal exposure in the
developmental toxicity studies in rats or rabbits, nor in the 2-
generation rat reproduction study.
3. Conclusion. The FQPA safety factor is reduced to 1X for all
exposure scenarios except for inhalation exposure. The Agency is
retaining a 10X database uncertainty factor (UFDB) to assess
risk to dodine inhalation scenarios to account for the lack of an
acceptable inhalation toxicity study.
i. Except for an acceptable inhalation toxicity study, the
toxicology database for dodine and DGH is complete and adequate to
assess potential risk to infants and children. The database contains
the following toxicity studies: prenatal developmental studies (rats
and rabbits); and a reproduction study in rats.
ii. Neurotoxicity studies are not available for dodine or DGH.
Clinical signs (excessive salivation and hunched posture/hypoactivity)
were observed in chronic studies of dodine in rats and mice but were
not dose-related or statistically significant. Excessive salivation in
dogs after dodine (capsule) exposure showed a treatment-related dose
response; however, it was not consistent with a neurological adverse
effect since it was seen prior to dosing and was a persistent finding
throughout the study. It is possible that the excessive salivation was
a result of the irritant properties of dodine. In addition, no evidence
of neuropathology was observed in the available studies. The Hazard and
Science Policy Council (HASPOC) recommended waiving the requirement for
the acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies, based on (1) the low
acute oral toxicity of dodine (Toxicity Category III); (2) the lack of
neurotoxicity in the dodine toxicity database; and (3) no neurotoxicity
concerns for structurally related compounds to dodine.
iii. Based on the available dodine and DGH toxicity studies, there
was no evidence of increased susceptibility (quantitative or
qualitative) in pups or fetuses as compared to adults based on rat and
rabbit developmental studies
[[Page 86272]]
and a rat multi-generation reproduction study. In rat and rabbit
prenatal developmental studies, there was no toxicity identified in the
fetuses up to the highest dose tested. In the 2-generation reproduction
study, decreases in body weight and food consumption were seen in pups
at the same dose at which maternal toxicity (decreases in body weight,
body weight gain, and food consumption) was observed.
iv. The exposure databases are sufficient to determine the nature
and magnitude of the residue in food and drinking water. The dodine
residue chemistry database is complete. The exposure assessment for
drinking water provides a conservative approach for estimating dodine
and DGH concentrations from drinking water sources, and thus is
unlikely to underestimate exposure. The food and drinking water dietary
exposure analyses are unlikely to underestimate exposure as they
incorporated conservative assumptions for dodine and DGH.
E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing dietary (food and drinking water)
exposure estimates to the acute population-adjusted dose (aPAD) and
chronic population-adjusted dose (cPAD). Short- intermediate- and
chronic-term risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated total food,
water, and residential exposure to the appropriate points of departure
to ensure that an adequate margin of exposure (MOE) exists.
1. Acute risk. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral
exposure was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected.
Therefore, dodine is not expected to pose an acute risk.
2. Chronic risk. The chronic dietary risk assessment includes only
food and water exposure from dodine and DGH. Chronic dietary risks from
dodine (food and drinking water) are below the Agency's level of
concern of 100% of the cPAD; they are 6.1% of the cPAD for all infants
less than 1 year old, the group with the highest exposure. Chronic
dietary risks from DGH (food and water) are below the Agency's level of
concern of 100% of the cPAD; they are 95% of the cPAD for children 1 to
2 years old, the group with the highest exposure.
There are no chronic non-occupational exposures, so the aggregate
chronic risk assessment is equal to the chronic dietary exposure
analysis of food and drinking water. The chronic aggregate assessment
includes: (1) food only contributions from agricultural uses of dodine,
including the proposed uses; (2) food only contributions from DGH in
paper and paperboard intended for use in contact with food; and (3)
drinking water only contributions from DGH in water from cooling tower
uses, which is protective of drinking water exposures resulting from
conventional agricultural uses of dodine. This aggregate assessment
resulted in risk estimates that are below the Agency's level of concern
of 100% of the cPAD; they are 98% of the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years
old, the group with the highest exposure, which is considered
protective for all other population subgroups.
3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. Short- and intermediate-term
adverse effects were identified; however, dodine is not registered for
any use patterns that would result in short- and/or intermediate-term
residential exposure. Short- and intermediate-term risk is assessed
based on short- and intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic
dietary exposure. Because there is no short-or intermediate-term
residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been
assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as
protective as the POD used to assess short-term risk), no further
assessment of short- or intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA
relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating short- and
intermediate-term risk for dodine.
4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. There was equivocal
evidence of carcinogenicity in rat and mouse carcinogenicity studies;
however, an evaluation of the carcinogenic potential of dodine was
performed which concluded that the weight of evidence indicates that
dodine and DGH are ``Not Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans.''
Therefore, dodine and DGH are not expected to pose a cancer risk to
humans.
5. Determination of safety. Therefore, based on the risk
assessments and information described above, EPA concludes there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children, from aggregate exposure to
dodine residues. More detailed information on this action can be found
in the Dodine Human Health Risk Assessment in docket ID EPA-HQ-OPP-
2021-0657.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Method 45137, which is entitled ``Dodine: Analytical Method for
Dodine in Fruit,'' is available for the enforcement of tolerances of
dodine in/on plant commodities. This method is a Gas Chromatograph/Mass
Selective Detection (GC/MSD) procedure based on extracting dodine from
fruit by homogenization with methanol. The method may be requested
from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center,
701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-
2905; email address: [email protected].
B. International Residue Limits
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
Codex has established MRLs for residues of dodine in or on apple at
5 ppm; pear at 5 ppm; cherry at 3 ppm; nectarine at 5 ppm; and peach at
5 ppm. The U.S. tolerances are harmonized with the corresponding Codex
MRLs except for cherry. The cherry field trial data show that residues
from the domestic labeled use of dodine may exceed the 3 ppm Codex
cherry MRL. Therefore, it is not possible to harmonize with the Codex
MRL based on the U.S. application pattern.
C. Revisions to Tolerances
The Agency is establishing the tolerance level for ``olive, with
pit'' at 0.4 ppm instead of the requested level of 0.3 ppm. Two of the
2011 olive trials from Greece were determined to be replicates, and
this determination resulted in a higher calculated maximum residue
limit (MRL) than the petitioner requested.
[[Page 86273]]
D. Response to Comments
Two comments were received in response to the Notice of Filing by
the same commenter. The commenter stated in part that ``we need to stop
all chemical use on vegetables'' and that ``toxic in your body kill
you.'' Although the Agency recognizes that some individuals believe
that pesticides should be banned on agricultural crops, the existing
legal framework provided by section 408 of the FFDCA authorizes EPA to
establish tolerances when it determines that the tolerances are safe.
Upon consideration of the validity, completeness, and reliability of
the available data as well as other factors the FFDCA requires EPA to
consider, EPA has determined that the dodine tolerances are safe. The
commenter has provided no information indicating that a safety
determination cannot be supported.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of dodine in or
on Fruit, pome, group 11-10 at 5 ppm; Fruit, stone, group 12-12 at 5
ppm; Nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.3 ppm; and Olive, with pit at 0.4 ppm.
Additionally, the following existing tolerances are removed as
unnecessary: Apple; Fruit, stone, crop group 12; Nut, tree, crop group
14; and Pear.
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 to 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).
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.
Dated: December 7, 2023.
Charles Smith,
Director, Registration Division, 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. Revise Sec. 180.172 to read as follows:
Sec. 180.172 Dodine; tolerances for residues.
(a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the
fungicide dodine, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on
the commodities in table1 to this paragraph (a). Compliance with the
tolerance levels specified in table1 is to be determined by measuring
only dodine, N-dodecylguanidine acetate; in or on the following
commodities.
Table 1 to Paragraph (a)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almond, hull.............................................. 30.0
Apple, wet pomace......................................... 15.0
Banana.................................................... 0.50
Fruit, pome, group 11-10.................................. 5
Fruit, stone, group 12-12................................. 5
Nut, tree, group 14-12.................................... 0.3
Olive, with pit........................................... 0.4
Peanut.................................................... 0.013
Strawberry................................................ 5.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b)-(d) [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2023-27254 Filed 12-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P