Triclopyr; Pesticide Tolerances, 14591-14594 [2024-04017]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2022–0890; FRL–11763–01–
OCSPP]
Triclopyr; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes a
tolerance for residues of triclopyr,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on sugarcane, cane.
The Interregional Project Number 4 (IR–
4) requested this tolerance under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
February 28, 2024. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before April 29, 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–2022–0890, is
available online at https://
www.regulations.gov or in-person 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. For the latest
status information on EPA/DC services,
docket access, visit https://
www.epa.gov/.
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:
SUMMARY:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Feb 27, 2024
Jkt 262001
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Office of the Federal Register’s eCFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/
current/.
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–2022–0890 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, 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–
2022–0890, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
14591
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of July 5, 2023
(88 FR 42935) (FRL–10579–05–OCSPP),
EPA issued a document pursuant to
FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of
pesticide petition (PP2E9028) by the
Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR–
4), North Carolina State University,
1730 Varsity Drive, Venture IV, Suite
210, Raleigh, NC 27606. The petition
requests to amend 40 CFR 180.417 by
establishing a tolerance for residues of
triclopyr, 2-[(3,5,6-trichloro-2pyridinyl)oxy]acetic acid, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on
sugarcane, cane at 0.04 parts per million
(ppm) resulting from the application of
the butoxyethyl ester of triclopyr,
triethylamine salt of triclopyr, or
choline salt of triclopyr. The petition
also requests to remove the established
time-limited tolerance for residues of
triclopyr in or on sugarcane, cane at 40
ppm. That document referenced a
summary of the petition prepared by IR–
4, the petitioner, which is available in
the docket (EPA–HQ–OPP–2022–0890),
https://www.regulations.gov.
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
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
28FER1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
14592
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
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 triclopyr
including exposure resulting from the
tolerances established by this action.
EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks
associated with triclopyr follows.
In an effort to streamline its
publications in the Federal Register,
EPA is not reprinting sections that
repeat what has been previously
published for tolerance rulemakings for
the same pesticide chemical. Where
scientific information concerning a
particular chemical remains unchanged,
the content of those sections would not
vary between tolerance rulemakings,
and EPA considers referral back to those
sections as sufficient to provide an
explanation of the information EPA
considered in making its safety
determination for the new rulemaking.
EPA has previously published
tolerance rulemakings for triclopyr in
which EPA concluded, based on the
available information, that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm would
result from aggregate exposure to
triclopyr and established tolerances for
residues of that chemical. EPA is
incorporating previously published
sections from these rulemakings as
described further in this rulemaking, as
they remain unchanged.
Toxicological Profile. For a discussion
of the Toxicological Profile of triclopyr,
see Unit III.A. of the final rule published
in the Federal Register of February 25,
2016 (81 FR 9353) (FRL–9941–87).
Toxicological Points of Departure/
Levels of Concern. A summary of the
toxicological endpoints and points of
departure for triclopyr used for human
risk assessment can be found in the
document, ‘‘Triclopyr. Human Health
Risk Assessment for Section 3 Use on
Sugarcane’’ in docket ID EPA–HQ–OPP–
2022–0890. As explained in the Food
Quality Protection Act (FQPA) section
below, the FQPA safety factor for shortand intermediate-term inhalation
exposures has decreased from 10X to 1X
since the February 25, 2016, final rule
so the level of concern for short- and
intermediate-term inhalation exposures
is now 100.
Exposure Assessment. EPA’s dietary
exposure assessments have been
updated to include the additional
exposures from the petitioned-for
tolerance. Acute and chronic dietary
(food and drinking water) exposure and
risk assessments were conducted using
the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
software using the Food Commodity
Intake Database (DEEM–FCID) Version
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Feb 27, 2024
Jkt 262001
4.02. This software uses 2005–2010 food
consumption data from the USDA’s
National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in
America (NHANES/WWEIA). The acute
dietary exposure assessment was
unrefined, using tolerance-level
residues for all registered and proposed
commodities. The chronic dietary
exposure assessment was slightly
refined, using tolerance-level residues
for all commodities except milk. An
anticipated residue calculated from a
recently submitted livestock feeding
study was used for milk. HED default
processing factors were used to estimate
residues in processed commodities.
Drinking water was incorporated
directly into the dietary assessment. The
acute and chronic dietary exposure
assessments assumed 100% crop treated
for all registered and proposed
commodities.
The Agency classified triclopyr as a
‘‘Group D Chemical—unable to be
classified as to human carcinogenicity.’’
This is based on marginal evidence of
mammary tumors in female rats and
mice and benign adrenal
pheochromocytomas in male rats. There
was no evidence of mutagenicity in a
full battery of studies for triclopyr.
Therefore, a cancer risk assessment was
not conducted. The use of the chronic
reference dose (RfD), which is derived
from the most protective point of
departure (POD) from the tox database,
will adequately account for all chronic
toxicity, including potential
carcinogenicity that could result from
exposure to triclopyr. A 100X
uncertainty factor (10X for interspecies
extrapolation and 10X for intraspecies
variation) was incorporated into the
chronic RfD. Since the FQPA SF has
been reduced to 1X, the chronic
population-adjusted dose (cPAD) is
equal to the chronic RfD.
Drinking water exposure. EPA revised
the triclopyr drinking water assessment
since the February 25, 2016, final rule
as part of Registration Review using
current models, newly submitted
studies and changes in labels. The
estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) were higher for surface water
sources than for ground water sources.
The acute dietary exposure assessment
used the highest 1-in-10-year acute
EDWC of 758 ppb of triclopyr and the
chronic dietary exposure assessment
incorporated the highest 1-in-10-year
chronic EDWC of 396 ppb of triclopyr.
The drinking water models, and their
descriptions are available at the EPA
internet site: https://www.epa.gov/
pesticide-science-and-assessingpesticide-risks/models-pesticide-riskassessment.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Non-occupational exposure. The
proposed use on sugarcane does not
involve applications by homeowners or
commercial applicators in residential
settings. Therefore, no new residential
exposure is expected. The residential
exposure assessment used the same
assumptions as described in the
February 25, 2016, final rule.
Cumulative exposures. 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 triclopyr and any
other substances. 3,5,6-trichloro-2pyridinol, commonly known as TCP, is
a metabolite of triclopyr, chlorpyrifos,
and chlorpyrifos-methyl. Risk
assessment of TCP was conducted in
2002, which concluded that the acute
and chronic dietary aggregate exposure
estimates are below EPA’s level of
concern. As TCP is not a residue of
concern in plants and the proposed use
on sugarcane will not result in any
additional exposure to TCP, the results
of the 2002 TCP assessment are still
considered valid. For the purposes of
this action, EPA has not assumed that
triclopyr has a common mechanism of
toxicity with other substances.
Safety Factor for Infants and
Children. 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 (FQPA 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.
Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
Offspring and developmental effects
occurred in the presence of maternal
and parental toxicity. In the twogeneration reproduction study with
triclopyr acid, rare malformations,
including exencephaly (brain protrudes
outside of the skull) and ablepharia
(absence of eyelids), were seen in rat
pups at the mid- and high-doses (25 mg/
kg/day and 250 mg/kg/day,
respectively). These malformations were
considered, using a weight-of-evidence
(WOE) approach, to be evidence of
increased qualitative susceptibility. In
the rat developmental toxicity study
with triclopyr acid, cleft palate,
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
28FER1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
brachycephaly (flat head syndrome),
and delayed ossification occurred at the
highest dose tested (200 mg/kg/day)
while the no-observed-adverse-effect
level (NOAEL) for maternal toxicity was
not established since clinical signs of
severe toxicity due to the bolus
administration of a low pH compound
were seen at the lowest dose tested (50
mg/kg/day). There were no other
concerns for susceptibility identified in
the other developmental studies where
developmental and maternal effects
were seen at 100 mg/kg/day and 300
mg/kg/day in the rabbit and rat,
respectively.
Conclusion. EPA has determined that
reliable data show the safety of infants
and children would be adequately
protected if the FQPA SF were reduced
from 10X to 1X for all exposure
scenarios based on the following
considerations:
1. The existing toxicological database
is adequate for characterizing triclopyr
toxicity and quantification of hazard for
dietary and occupational exposures. The
developmental toxicity studies in rats
and rabbits and two-generation
reproduction toxicity studies in rats are
available to assess potential fetal/
offspring sensitivity;
2. There is no evidence of
neurotoxicity from triclopyr exposure;
3. While there is evidence of
increased qualitative susceptibility to
offspring from triclopyr exposure in the
two-generation reproduction toxicity
study, the concern is low since effects
are well-characterized with clearly
established NOAEL/lowest-observedadverse-effect level (LOAEL) values,
effects were seen in the presence of
parental toxicity, and selected
endpoints are protective of the observed
effects; and
4. There are no residual uncertainties
with respect to exposure data. The
dietary food exposure assessment
utilizes tolerance-level residues
(established or recommended) except
milk (an anticipated residue was used
for milk in the chronic assessment) and
100% crop treated for all proposed/
established commodities. By using these
assumptions, the acute and chronic
exposures/risks will not be
underestimated.
The dietary drinking water
assessment utilizes water concentration
values generated by models and
associated modeling parameters that are
designed to provide conservative,
health-protective, high-end estimates of
water concentrations that will not likely
be exceeded. The residential handler
and post-application exposure
assessments are based upon the
residential standard operating
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Feb 27, 2024
Jkt 262001
procedures (SOPs) in conjunction with
Pesticide Handlers Exposure Database
unit exposures. The residential SOPs are
based upon reasonable worst-case
assumptions and are not expected to
underestimate risk. These assessments
of exposure are not likely to
underestimate the resulting estimates of
risk from exposure to triclopyr.
Aggregate Risk and Determination of
Safety. EPA determines whether acute
and chronic dietary pesticide exposures
are safe by comparing dietary exposure
estimates to the acute populationadjusted dose (aPAD) and chronic PAD
(cPAD). Short-, intermediate-, and
chronic-term risks are evaluated by
comparing the estimated total food,
water, and residential exposure to the
appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate margin of exposure (MOE)
exists.
Acute dietary risks are below the
Agency’s level of concern of 100% of
the aPAD; they are 53% of the aPAD for
females 13–49 years old and 8% of the
aPAD for all infants, the most highly
exposed population subgroup. No acute
residential/recreational exposures are
expected, so the acute aggregate risk is
equivalent to the acute dietary risk and
is not of concern. Chronic dietary risks
are below the Agency’s level of concern
of 100% of the cPAD; they are 46% of
the cPAD for all infants, the most highly
exposed population subgroup. No longterm residential exposures are expected,
so the chronic aggregate risk is
equivalent to the chronic dietary risk
and is not of concern.
For the short-term aggregate risk
assessment, potential residential
exposures were combined with food and
drinking water exposures. Specifically,
the short-term aggregate assessment for
adults combines dietary (food +
drinking water) exposures with handler
inhalation exposures resulting from the
registered turf use and the MOE is 410.
For children 1 to <2 years old, the shortterm aggregate assessment combines
dietary (food + drinking water) exposure
with potential post-application
incidental oral exposure resulting from
the registered turf use and the MOE is
360. For children 3 to <6 years old, the
short-term aggregate assessment
combines dietary (food + drinking
water) exposure with potential postapplication inhalation and incidental
oral swimmer exposure resulting from
the registered aquatic use and the MOE
is 120. As the short-term aggregate
MOEs are greater than 100, the risks are
not of concern. Although there are
intermediate-term residential exposures,
an intermediate-term aggregate was not
separately assessed since: 1. the shortand intermediate-term points of
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
14593
departure are the same and 2. the shortterm aggregate provides a worst-case
estimate of residential exposure. For
these reasons, the short-term aggregate
is protective of the longer-term
exposures.
As stated in Unit III.A. of the February
25, 2016, final rule, EPA has determined
that an aggregate exposure risk
assessment for cancer risk is not
required based on WOE conclusions on
the marginal evidence of carcinogenicity
in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity
studies and the use of the chronic RfD
which will adequately account for any
potential carcinogenic effects.
Therefore, based on the risk
assessments and information described
above, EPA concludes that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result to the general population, or to
infants and children, from aggregate
exposure to triclopyr residues. More
detailed information on this action can
be found in the document titled
‘‘Triclopyr. Human Health Risk
Assessment for Section 3 Use on
Sugarcane’’ in docket ID EPA–HQ–OPP–
2022–0890.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
For details about the analytical
enforcement methodology, see Unit
IV.A. of the final rule published in the
Federal Register of February 25, 2016.
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 has not established any
MRLs for triclopyr.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For
Tolerances
EPA is not removing the established
time-limited tolerance for residues of
triclopyr in or on sugarcane, cane at 40
ppm. The use pattern in the emergency
exemption for triclopyr on sugarcane is
different than the Section 3 use
supported by this tolerance rule and
there may be sugarcane in the channels
of trade with higher residues from use
under the emergency exemption.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established
for residues of the herbicide triclopyr,
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on sugarcane, cane at
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
28FER1
14594
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 40 / Wednesday, February 28, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
0.04 ppm, resulting from the application
of the butoxyethyl ester of triclopyr,
triethylamine salt of triclopyr, or
choline salt of triclopyr.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes a tolerance
under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the
Agency. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has exempted these types
of actions from review under Executive
Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action
has been exempted from review under
Executive Order 12866, this action is
not subject to Executive Order 13211,
entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive
Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997). This action does not
contain any information collections
subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require
any special considerations under
Executive Order 12898, entitled
‘‘Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established on the basis of a petition
under FFDCA section 408(d), such as
the tolerance in this final rule, do not
require the issuance of a proposed rule,
the requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers,
food processors, food handlers, and food
retailers, not States or tribes, nor does
this action alter the relationships or
distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress
in the preemption provisions of FFDCA
section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency
has determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on States
or tribal governments, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States or tribal
governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian
tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined
that Executive Order 13132, entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) and Executive Order 13175,
entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
With Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:07 Feb 27, 2024
Jkt 262001
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: February 21, 2024.
Charles Smith,
Director, Registration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended 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 § 180.417, amend paragraph
(a)(1) by adding a heading for the table
and adding in alphabetical order an
entry for ‘‘Sugarcane, cane’’ to read as
follows:
■
§ 180.417
Triclopyr; tolerance for residues.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(1)
Commodity
Parts per
million
*
*
*
*
Sugarcane, cane ........................
*
0.04
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2024–04017 Filed 2–27–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 300
Docket No. 220801–0167; RTID 0648–XD737]
International Fisheries; Pacific Tuna
Fisheries; Inseason Action for 2024
Commercial Pacific Bluefin Tuna
Annual Catch Limit in the Eastern
Pacific Ocean
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; inseason
announcement of 2024 annual catch
limit.
AGENCY:
NMFS is announcing that the
Pacific bluefin tuna (PBF) 2024 annual
catch limit for U.S. commercial fishing
vessels in the eastern Pacific Ocean
(EPO) is 720 metric tons (mt).
DATES: The rule is effective 12 a.m. local
time on March 28, 2024, through 11:59
p.m. local time on December 31, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tyler Lawson, NMFS West Coast
Region, 503–230–5421.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
United States is a member of the InterAmerican Tropical Tuna Commission
(IATTC), which was established under
the Convention for the Establishment of
an IATTC signed in 1949 (1949
Convention). The 1949 Convention
provides an international agreement to
ensure the effective international
conservation and management of highly
migratory species of fish in the IATTC
Convention Area. In 2003, the IATTC
updated the 1949 Convention through
the adoption of the Convention for the
Strengthening of the IATTC Established
by the 1949 Convention between the
United States of America and the
Republic of Costa Rica (Antigua
Convention). The IATTC Convention
Area, as amended by the Antigua
Convention, includes the waters of the
EPO bounded by the coast of the
Americas, the 50° N and 50° S parallels,
and the 150° W meridian.
Fishing for PBF in the EPO is
managed, in part, under the Tuna
Conventions Act of 1950, as amended
(the Act), 16 U.S.C. 951 et seq. Under
the Act, NMFS must publish regulations
to carry out recommendations and
decisions of the IATTC in consultation
with the Department of State.
Regulations implementing conservation
and management measures for tuna and
tuna-like species in the EPO are codified
at 50 CFR part 300, subpart C.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\28FER1.SGM
28FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 40 (Wednesday, February 28, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14591-14594]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-04017]
[[Page 14591]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0890; FRL-11763-01-OCSPP]
Triclopyr; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a tolerance for residues of
triclopyr, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on
sugarcane, cane. The Interregional Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested
this tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective February 28, 2024. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 29, 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-2022-0890, is available online at
https://www.regulations.gov or in-person 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. For the latest status information on EPA/DC services, docket
access, visit https://www.epa.gov/.
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).
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 Office of the
Federal Register's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/.
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-2022-0890 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, 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-2022-0890, 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/.
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance
In the Federal Register of July 5, 2023 (88 FR 42935) (FRL-10579-
05-OCSPP), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3),
21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of pesticide petition
(PP2E9028) by the Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), North
Carolina State University, 1730 Varsity Drive, Venture IV, Suite 210,
Raleigh, NC 27606. The petition requests to amend 40 CFR 180.417 by
establishing a tolerance for residues of triclopyr, 2-[(3,5,6-
trichloro-2- pyridinyl)oxy]acetic acid, including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on sugarcane, cane at 0.04 parts per million (ppm)
resulting from the application of the butoxyethyl ester of triclopyr,
triethylamine salt of triclopyr, or choline salt of triclopyr. The
petition also requests to remove the established time-limited tolerance
for residues of triclopyr in or on sugarcane, cane at 40 ppm. That
document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by IR-4, the
petitioner, which is available in the docket (EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0890),
https://www.regulations.gov.
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
[[Page 14592]]
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 triclopyr including exposure resulting from the tolerances
established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks
associated with triclopyr follows.
In an effort to streamline its publications in the Federal
Register, EPA is not reprinting sections that repeat what has been
previously published for tolerance rulemakings for the same pesticide
chemical. Where scientific information concerning a particular chemical
remains unchanged, the content of those sections would not vary between
tolerance rulemakings, and EPA considers referral back to those
sections as sufficient to provide an explanation of the information EPA
considered in making its safety determination for the new rulemaking.
EPA has previously published tolerance rulemakings for triclopyr in
which EPA concluded, based on the available information, that there is
a reasonable certainty that no harm would result from aggregate
exposure to triclopyr and established tolerances for residues of that
chemical. EPA is incorporating previously published sections from these
rulemakings as described further in this rulemaking, as they remain
unchanged.
Toxicological Profile. For a discussion of the Toxicological
Profile of triclopyr, see Unit III.A. of the final rule published in
the Federal Register of February 25, 2016 (81 FR 9353) (FRL-9941-87).
Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern. A summary of
the toxicological endpoints and points of departure for triclopyr used
for human risk assessment can be found in the document, ``Triclopyr.
Human Health Risk Assessment for Section 3 Use on Sugarcane'' in docket
ID EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0890. As explained in the Food Quality Protection
Act (FQPA) section below, the FQPA safety factor for short- and
intermediate-term inhalation exposures has decreased from 10X to 1X
since the February 25, 2016, final rule so the level of concern for
short- and intermediate-term inhalation exposures is now 100.
Exposure Assessment. EPA's dietary exposure assessments have been
updated to include the additional exposures from the petitioned-for
tolerance. Acute and chronic dietary (food and drinking water) exposure
and risk assessments were conducted using the Dietary Exposure
Evaluation Model software using the Food Commodity Intake Database
(DEEM-FCID) Version 4.02. This software uses 2005-2010 food consumption
data from the USDA's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey,
What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). The acute dietary exposure
assessment was unrefined, using tolerance-level residues for all
registered and proposed commodities. The chronic dietary exposure
assessment was slightly refined, using tolerance-level residues for all
commodities except milk. An anticipated residue calculated from a
recently submitted livestock feeding study was used for milk. HED
default processing factors were used to estimate residues in processed
commodities. Drinking water was incorporated directly into the dietary
assessment. The acute and chronic dietary exposure assessments assumed
100% crop treated for all registered and proposed commodities.
The Agency classified triclopyr as a ``Group D Chemical--unable to
be classified as to human carcinogenicity.'' This is based on marginal
evidence of mammary tumors in female rats and mice and benign adrenal
pheochromocytomas in male rats. There was no evidence of mutagenicity
in a full battery of studies for triclopyr. Therefore, a cancer risk
assessment was not conducted. The use of the chronic reference dose
(RfD), which is derived from the most protective point of departure
(POD) from the tox database, will adequately account for all chronic
toxicity, including potential carcinogenicity that could result from
exposure to triclopyr. A 100X uncertainty factor (10X for interspecies
extrapolation and 10X for intraspecies variation) was incorporated into
the chronic RfD. Since the FQPA SF has been reduced to 1X, the chronic
population-adjusted dose (cPAD) is equal to the chronic RfD.
Drinking water exposure. EPA revised the triclopyr drinking water
assessment since the February 25, 2016, final rule as part of
Registration Review using current models, newly submitted studies and
changes in labels. The estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)
were higher for surface water sources than for ground water sources.
The acute dietary exposure assessment used the highest 1-in-10-year
acute EDWC of 758 ppb of triclopyr and the chronic dietary exposure
assessment incorporated the highest 1-in-10-year chronic EDWC of 396
ppb of triclopyr. The drinking water models, and their descriptions are
available at the EPA internet site: https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/models-pesticide-risk-assessment.
Non-occupational exposure. The proposed use on sugarcane does not
involve applications by homeowners or commercial applicators in
residential settings. Therefore, no new residential exposure is
expected. The residential exposure assessment used the same assumptions
as described in the February 25, 2016, final rule.
Cumulative exposures. 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
triclopyr and any other substances. 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol,
commonly known as TCP, is a metabolite of triclopyr, chlorpyrifos, and
chlorpyrifos-methyl. Risk assessment of TCP was conducted in 2002,
which concluded that the acute and chronic dietary aggregate exposure
estimates are below EPA's level of concern. As TCP is not a residue of
concern in plants and the proposed use on sugarcane will not result in
any additional exposure to TCP, the results of the 2002 TCP assessment
are still considered valid. For the purposes of this action, EPA has
not assumed that triclopyr has a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances.
Safety Factor for Infants and Children. 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 (FQPA 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.
Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. Offspring and developmental
effects occurred in the presence of maternal and parental toxicity. In
the two-generation reproduction study with triclopyr acid, rare
malformations, including exencephaly (brain protrudes outside of the
skull) and ablepharia (absence of eyelids), were seen in rat pups at
the mid- and high-doses (25 mg/kg/day and 250 mg/kg/day, respectively).
These malformations were considered, using a weight-of-evidence (WOE)
approach, to be evidence of increased qualitative susceptibility. In
the rat developmental toxicity study with triclopyr acid, cleft palate,
[[Page 14593]]
brachycephaly (flat head syndrome), and delayed ossification occurred
at the highest dose tested (200 mg/kg/day) while the no-observed-
adverse-effect level (NOAEL) for maternal toxicity was not established
since clinical signs of severe toxicity due to the bolus administration
of a low pH compound were seen at the lowest dose tested (50 mg/kg/
day). There were no other concerns for susceptibility identified in the
other developmental studies where developmental and maternal effects
were seen at 100 mg/kg/day and 300 mg/kg/day in the rabbit and rat,
respectively.
Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the safety
of infants and children would be adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced from 10X to 1X for all exposure scenarios based on the
following considerations:
1. The existing toxicological database is adequate for
characterizing triclopyr toxicity and quantification of hazard for
dietary and occupational exposures. The developmental toxicity studies
in rats and rabbits and two-generation reproduction toxicity studies in
rats are available to assess potential fetal/offspring sensitivity;
2. There is no evidence of neurotoxicity from triclopyr exposure;
3. While there is evidence of increased qualitative susceptibility
to offspring from triclopyr exposure in the two-generation reproduction
toxicity study, the concern is low since effects are well-characterized
with clearly established NOAEL/lowest-observed-adverse-effect level
(LOAEL) values, effects were seen in the presence of parental toxicity,
and selected endpoints are protective of the observed effects; and
4. There are no residual uncertainties with respect to exposure
data. The dietary food exposure assessment utilizes tolerance-level
residues (established or recommended) except milk (an anticipated
residue was used for milk in the chronic assessment) and 100% crop
treated for all proposed/established commodities. By using these
assumptions, the acute and chronic exposures/risks will not be
underestimated.
The dietary drinking water assessment utilizes water concentration
values generated by models and associated modeling parameters that are
designed to provide conservative, health-protective, high-end estimates
of water concentrations that will not likely be exceeded. The
residential handler and post-application exposure assessments are based
upon the residential standard operating procedures (SOPs) in
conjunction with Pesticide Handlers Exposure Database unit exposures.
The residential SOPs are based upon reasonable worst-case assumptions
and are not expected to underestimate risk. These assessments of
exposure are not likely to underestimate the resulting estimates of
risk from exposure to triclopyr.
Aggregate Risk and Determination of Safety. EPA determines whether
acute and chronic dietary pesticide exposures are safe by comparing
dietary exposure estimates to the acute population-adjusted dose (aPAD)
and chronic PAD (cPAD). Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the estimated total food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an adequate
margin of exposure (MOE) exists.
Acute dietary risks are below the Agency's level of concern of 100%
of the aPAD; they are 53% of the aPAD for females 13-49 years old and
8% of the aPAD for all infants, the most highly exposed population
subgroup. No acute residential/recreational exposures are expected, so
the acute aggregate risk is equivalent to the acute dietary risk and is
not of concern. Chronic dietary risks are below the Agency's level of
concern of 100% of the cPAD; they are 46% of the cPAD for all infants,
the most highly exposed population subgroup. No long-term residential
exposures are expected, so the chronic aggregate risk is equivalent to
the chronic dietary risk and is not of concern.
For the short-term aggregate risk assessment, potential residential
exposures were combined with food and drinking water exposures.
Specifically, the short-term aggregate assessment for adults combines
dietary (food + drinking water) exposures with handler inhalation
exposures resulting from the registered turf use and the MOE is 410.
For children 1 to <2 years old, the short-term aggregate assessment
combines dietary (food + drinking water) exposure with potential post-
application incidental oral exposure resulting from the registered turf
use and the MOE is 360. For children 3 to <6 years old, the short-term
aggregate assessment combines dietary (food + drinking water) exposure
with potential post-application inhalation and incidental oral swimmer
exposure resulting from the registered aquatic use and the MOE is 120.
As the short-term aggregate MOEs are greater than 100, the risks are
not of concern. Although there are intermediate-term residential
exposures, an intermediate-term aggregate was not separately assessed
since: 1. the short- and intermediate-term points of departure are the
same and 2. the short-term aggregate provides a worst-case estimate of
residential exposure. For these reasons, the short-term aggregate is
protective of the longer-term exposures.
As stated in Unit III.A. of the February 25, 2016, final rule, EPA
has determined that an aggregate exposure risk assessment for cancer
risk is not required based on WOE conclusions on the marginal evidence
of carcinogenicity in two adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies and
the use of the chronic RfD which will adequately account for any
potential carcinogenic effects.
Therefore, based on the risk assessments and information described
above, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result to the general population, or to infants and children, from
aggregate exposure to triclopyr residues. More detailed information on
this action can be found in the document titled ``Triclopyr. Human
Health Risk Assessment for Section 3 Use on Sugarcane'' in docket ID
EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0890.
IV. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
For details about the analytical enforcement methodology, see Unit
IV.A. of the final rule published in the Federal Register of February
25, 2016.
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 has not established any MRLs for
triclopyr.
C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
EPA is not removing the established time-limited tolerance for
residues of triclopyr in or on sugarcane, cane at 40 ppm. The use
pattern in the emergency exemption for triclopyr on sugarcane is
different than the Section 3 use supported by this tolerance rule and
there may be sugarcane in the channels of trade with higher residues
from use under the emergency exemption.
V. Conclusion
Therefore, a tolerance is established for residues of the herbicide
triclopyr, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on
sugarcane, cane at
[[Page 14594]]
0.04 ppm, resulting from the application of the butoxyethyl ester of
triclopyr, triethylamine salt of triclopyr, or choline salt of
triclopyr.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 21, 2024.
Charles Smith,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended 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. 180.417, amend paragraph (a)(1) by adding a heading for the
table and adding in alphabetical order an entry for ``Sugarcane, cane''
to read as follows:
Sec. 180.417 Triclopyr; tolerance for residues.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
Table 1 to Paragraph (a)(1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Sugarcane, cane............................................ 0.04
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2024-04017 Filed 2-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P