Metamitron; Pesticide Tolerance for Emergency Exemptions, 56669-56673 [2024-15067]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
I. General Information
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2024–0221; FRL–12054–01–
OCSPP]
Metamitron; Pesticide Tolerance for
Emergency Exemptions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Final rule.
This regulation establishes a
time-limited tolerance for residues of
metamitron in or on the raw agricultural
commodity (RAC) beet, sugar, roots.
This action is in response to EPA’s
granting of emergency exemptions
under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
authorizing use of the pesticide on the
crop, sugar beets. This regulation
establishes a maximum permissible
level for residues of metamitron in or on
the RAC beet, sugar, roots. The timelimited tolerance expires on December
31, 2027.
SUMMARY:
This regulation is effective July
10, 2024. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received on or before
September 9, 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).
DATES:
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2024–0221, 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
Docket Public Reading Room is (202)
566–1744. Please review the visitor
instructions and additional information
about the docket available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
ADDRESSES:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
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:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 Jul 09, 2024
Jkt 262001
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
through the Office of the Federal
Register’s e-CFR site at https://
www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under section 408(g) of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
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–2024–0221 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
September 9, 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–
2024–0221, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
56669
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
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Background and Statutory Findings
EPA, on its own initiative, in
accordance with FFDCA sections 408(e)
and 408(l)(6) of, 21 U.S.C. 346a(e) and
346a(1)(6), is establishing a time-limited
tolerance for combined residues of
metamitron, (4-amino-3-methyl-6phenyl-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-one),
including its metabolites and
degradates, in or on the RAC beet, sugar,
roots at 0.01 parts per million (ppm).
This time-limited tolerance expires on
December 31, 2027.
Section 408(l)(6) of FFDCA requires
EPA to establish a time-limited
tolerance or exemption from the
requirement for a tolerance for pesticide
chemical residues in food that will
result from the use of a pesticide under
an emergency exemption granted by
EPA under FIFRA section 18. Such
tolerances can be established without
providing notice or period for public
comment. EPA does not intend for its
actions on FIFRA section 18 related
time-limited tolerances to set binding
precedents for the application of FFDCA
section 408 and the safety standard to
other tolerances and exemptions.
Section 408(e) of FFDCA allows EPA to
establish a tolerance or an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance on
its own initiative, i.e., without having
received any petition from an outside
party.
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
E:\FR\FM\10JYR1.SGM
10JYR1
56670
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
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.’’
Section 18 of FIFRA authorizes EPA
to exempt any Federal or State agency
from any provision of FIFRA, if EPA
determines that ‘‘emergency conditions
exist which require such exemption.’’
EPA has established regulations
governing such emergency exemptions
in 40 CFR part 166.
III. Emergency Exemptions for
Metamitron on Sugar Beets and FFDCA
Tolerances
The Colorado and Nebraska
Departments of Agriculture requested
emergency exemptions for use of
metamitron on the crop sugar beets to
control problematic weed populations
of Palmar amaranth, that are not
controlled by the available registered
pesticides, stating that significant
economic losses would be suffered
without adequate control of this weed.
After having reviewed the submissions,
EPA determined that emergency
conditions exist for Colorado and
Nebraska, and that the criteria for
approval of the emergency exemptions
were met. EPA has authorized specific
exemptions under FIFRA section 18 for
the use of metamitron on sugar beets for
control of Palmer amaranth in Colorado
and Nebraska.
As part of its evaluation of the
emergency exemption applications, EPA
assessed the potential risks presented by
residues of metamitron in or on the RAC
beet, sugar, roots. In doing so, EPA
considered the safety standard in
FFDCA section 408(b)(2), and EPA
decided that the necessary tolerance
under FFDCA section 408(l)(6) would be
consistent with the safety standard and
with FIFRA section 18. Consistent with
the need to move quickly on the
emergency exemptions in order to
address an urgent non-routine situation
and to ensure that the resulting food is
safe and lawful, EPA is issuing this
tolerance without notice and
opportunity for public comment as
provided in FFDCA section 408(l)(6).
Although this time-limited tolerance
expires on December 31, 2027, under
FFDCA section 408(l)(5), residues of the
pesticide not in excess of the amount
specified in the tolerance remaining in
or on beet, sugar, roots after that date
will not be unlawful, provided the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 Jul 09, 2024
Jkt 262001
pesticide was applied in a manner that
was lawful under FIFRA, and the
residues do not exceed a level that was
authorized by this time-limited
tolerance at the time of that application.
EPA will take action to revoke this timelimited tolerance earlier if any
experience with, scientific data on, or
other relevant information on this
pesticide indicate that the residues are
not safe.
Because this time-limited tolerance is
being approved under emergency
conditions, EPA has not made any
decisions about whether metamitron
meets FIFRA’s registration requirements
for use on the crop sugar beets or
whether permanent tolerances for this
use would be appropriate. Under these
circumstances, EPA does not believe
that this time-limited tolerance decision
serves as a basis for registration of
metamitron by a State for special local
needs under FIFRA section 24(c). Nor
does this tolerance by itself serve as the
authority for persons in any State other
than Colorado and Nebraska to use this
pesticide on the applicable crops under
FIFRA section 18 absent the issuance of
an emergency exemption applicable
within that State. For additional
information regarding the emergency
exemptions for metamitron, contact the
Agency’s Registration Division at the
address provided under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
IV. 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 the factors specified
in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has
reviewed the available scientific data
and other relevant information in
support of this action. EPA has
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
sufficient data to assess the hazards of
and to make a determination on
aggregate exposure expected as a result
of the emergency exemption requests
and the time-limited tolerance for
residues of metamitron in or on the RAC
beet, sugar, roots at 0.01 ppm. EPA’s
assessment of exposures and risks
associated with establishing the timelimited tolerance follows.
A. 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/assessinghuman-health-risk-pesticides.
Specific information on the studies
received and the nature of the adverse
effects caused by metamitron as well as
the no-observed-adverse-effect-level
(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the
toxicity studies can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov in the document
‘‘Metamitron. Human Health Risk
Assessment for Section 18 Emergency
Exemptions for Use on Sugar Beets in
Colorado and Nebraska’’ hereinafter
referred to as ‘‘Metamitron Human
Health Risk Assessment’’ in docket ID
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2024–0221. A
summary of the toxicological endpoints
for metamitron used for human risk
assessment can be found in this
document on pages 22–24.
E:\FR\FM\10JYR1.SGM
10JYR1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
B. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and
feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to metamitron, EPA
considered exposure under the timelimited tolerance established by this
action. EPA assessed dietary exposures
from metamitron 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.
Such effects were identified for
metamitron. In estimating acute dietary
exposure, EPA used food consumption
information from the 2005–2010 U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s National
Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey, What We Eat in America
(NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels
in food, EPA used the highest
anticipated combined residue levels in
sugar beet roots from field trials (for
metamitron and its metabolite
desamino-metamitron), a default
processing factor of 1 for processing
sugar beet roots into molasses and
assumed 100 percent crop treated (PCT).
The EPA is concerned when dietary risk
exceeds 100% of the acute population
adjustment dose (aPAD). The acute
dietary (food and drinking water)
exposure and risk estimates were not of
concern for the general U.S. population
and all population subgroups (i.e., all
risk estimates were <100% of the aPAD)
at the 95th percentile. Risk estimates for
both the general U.S. population and the
most highly exposed population (all
infants, <1 year old) are ≤5.5% of the
aPAD.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting
the chronic dietary exposure assessment
EPA used the food consumption data
from the 2005–2010 U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, What We
Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As
to residue levels in food, EPA used the
highest anticipated combined residue
levels from field trials (for metamitron
and its metabolite desaminometamitron), a default processing factor
of 1 for molasses, and assumed 100
percent crop treated (PCT). For chronic
assessments, the EPA is concerned
when dietary risk exceeds 100% of the
chronic population adjustment dose
(cPAD). The resulting chronic (food and
drinking water) risk estimates are not of
concern (<100% of the cPAD) for the
general U.S. population and all
population subgroups. Risk estimates
for both the general U.S. population and
the most highly exposed population
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 Jul 09, 2024
Jkt 262001
subgroup (all infants, <1 year old) are
≤4.0% of the cPAD.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data found
in the Metamitron Human Health Risk
Assessment, referenced in Unit IV.A.,
EPA has concluded that metamitron
does not pose a cancer risk to humans.
Therefore, a dietary exposure
assessment for the purpose of assessing
cancer risk is unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent
crop treated (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 this tolerance.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking
water. The Agency used screening level
water exposure models in the dietary
exposure analysis and risk assessment
for metamitron in drinking water. These
simulation models take into account
data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of metamitron.
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.
Based on the Pesticide Water
Calculator (PWC) model (ver. 2.001) and
updated drinking water scenarios, the
estimated drinking water concentrations
(EDWCs) of metamitron are 91 ppb parts
per billion (ppb) for acute exposures,
and 48 ppb for chronic exposures (noncancer assessments). Both EDWCs are
based upon surface water modelling,
which resulted in higher EDWCs (worst
case, more conservative) than those
from ground water models. The
modeled EDWCs were directly entered
into the dietary exposure models used
for estimating exposures from drinking
water (91 ppb for acute exposures and
48 ppb for chronic exposures).
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).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
56671
Metamitron is not registered for any
specific use patterns that would result
in residential exposure.
Further information regarding EPA
standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be
found at: https://www.epa.gov/
pesticide-science-and-assessingpesticide-risks/standard-operatingprocedures-residential-pesticide.
4. Cumulative effects from substances
with a common mechanism of toxicity.
Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA
requires that, when considering whether
to establish, modify, or revoke a
tolerance, the Agency consider
‘‘available information’’ concerning the
cumulative effects of a particular
pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other
substances that have a common
mechanism of toxicity.’’
EPA has not found metamitron to
share a common mechanism of toxicity
with any other substances, and
metamitron does not appear to produce
a toxic metabolite produced by other
substances. For the purposes of this
tolerance action, therefore, EPA has
assumed that metamitron does not have
a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances. For information
regarding EPA’s efforts to determine
which chemicals have a common
mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate
the cumulative effects of such
chemicals, see EPA’s website at https://
www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-andassessing-pesticide-risks/cumulativeassessment-risk-pesticides.
C. 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 (FQPA)
Safety Factor (SF). In applying this
provision, EPA either retains the default
value of 10X, or uses a different
additional SF when reliable data
available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.
There is no evidence of increased
susceptibility following in utero
exposure to metamitron in either the rat
or rabbit developmental toxicity studies
up to the highest doses tested, and there
is no evidence of increased quantitative
susceptibility following in utero and/or
pre-/post-natal exposure in the multi-
E:\FR\FM\10JYR1.SGM
10JYR1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
56672
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
generation reproduction studies in rats.
All offspring effects were observed at
the same or higher dose level than
maternal toxicity. Evidence of
qualitative sensitivity was demonstrated
in a multigeneration reproductive
toxicity study, as decreased offspring
survival was observed in the absence of
comparable parental toxicity. However,
the concern is low as the sensitivity was
observed at a higher dose level than the
established LOAEL/NOAEL for the
parental generation, a clear NOAEL/
LOAEL has been established for the
offspring generation, and all selected
endpoints are protective of the
qualitative sensitivity.
Reduction of the 10X FQPA SF to 1X
is appropriate as the database is
complete, no quantitative susceptibility
was observed, the concern for
qualitative sensitivity in a
multigeneration reproductive toxicity
study is low as it was observed at a
higher dose level than the established
parental NOAEL/LOAEL within the
study, the current PODs are protective
of the sensitivity, and clear NOAELs/
LOAELs have been established across
the database.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined
that reliable data show that the safety of
infants and children would be
adequately protected if the FQPA SF
were reduced to 1X. That decision is
based on the following findings:
i. The toxicity database for
metamitron is complete and adequate
for hazard characterization, toxicity
endpoint selection, and FQPA SF
consideration.
ii. Neurotoxicity (clinical signs and
functional observational battery (FOB)
findings) was observed in two nonguideline studies following an acute
exposure (single dose) in both mice and
rats. In a metabolism study, reduced
mobility and piloerection were observed
after a single oral dose, but the effects
resolved within 24 hours post-dosage.
No additional potentially neurotoxic
effects were observed across the
metamitron database, including the rat
subchronic neurotoxicity study (SCN),
at the doses tested. The concern for
neurotoxicity is low, as all selected
PODs are protective of the adverse
effects identified in the non-guideline
studies and the metabolism study.
Therefore, there is no need for a
developmental neurotoxicity study or
additional UFs to account for
neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that
metamitron results in increased
quantitative susceptibility after in utero
exposure to rats or rabbits in the
prenatal developmental studies. The
concern for qualitative sensitivity in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 Jul 09, 2024
Jkt 262001
multigeneration reproduction study is
low as it was observed at a higher dose
level than the established parental
NOAEL/LOAEL within the study, the
current PODs are protective of the
sensitivity, and clear NOAELs/LOAELs
have been established across the
database.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties
identified in the exposure databases.
The dietary food exposure assessments
were performed based on 100% CT and
anticipated residues based on crop field
trials with all residues below the limit
of quantitation for metamitron. The
limit of detection was used, and
standard processing factors applied to
estimate residues in molasses. EPA
made conservative (protective)
assumptions in the ground and surface
water modeling used to assess exposure
to metamitron in drinking water. These
assessments will not underestimate the
exposure and risks posed by
metamitron.
D. Aggregate Risks and Determination of
Safety
EPA determines whether acute and
chronic dietary pesticide exposures are
safe by comparing aggregate exposure
estimates to the acute PAD (aPAD) and
chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer
risks, EPA calculates the lifetime
probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-,
intermediate-, and chronic-term risks
are evaluated by comparing the
estimated aggregate food, water, and
residential exposure to the appropriate
PODs to ensure that an adequate MOE
exists. Since there are no residential
exposure scenarios, aggregate exposure
and risk are equivalent to the acute and
chronic dietary (food and drinking
water) exposure and risk, which are not
of concern.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure
assumptions discussed in this document
for acute exposure, the acute dietary
exposure from food and water to
metamitron will occupy 5.5% of the
aPAD for all infants, the population
group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure
assumptions described in this unit for
chronic exposure, EPA has concluded
that chronic exposure to metamitron
from food and water will utilize 4.0% of
the cPAD for all infants, the population
group receiving the greatest exposure.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term
aggregate exposure takes into account
short-term residential exposure plus
chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Metamitron is not
registered for uses that could result in
short-term residential exposure. Because
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
there is no short-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure
has already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess short-term risk), no further
assessment of short-term risk is
necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating short-term risk for
metamitron.
4. Intermediate-term risk.
Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term
non-dietary, non-occupational exposure
plus chronic exposure to food and water
(considered to be a background
exposure level). Metamitron is not
registered for any use patterns that
would result in intermediate-term
residential exposure. Because there is
no intermediate-term residential
exposure and chronic dietary exposure
has already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is
at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no
further assessment of intermediate-term
risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the
chronic dietary risk assessment for
evaluating intermediate-term risk for
metamitron.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.
population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in adequate
rodent carcinogenicity studies and the
low concern for mutagenic potential,
metamitron is not expected to pose a
cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on
these risk assessments, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that
no harm will result to the general
population, or to infants and children,
from aggregate exposure to metamitron
residues.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology
(high-performance liquid
chromatography method with tandem
mass spectrometry detection (LC/MS/
MS), Method SGS–17–01–03), is
available to enforce the tolerance
expression. 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
E:\FR\FM\10JYR1.SGM
10JYR1
56673
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 132 / Wednesday, July 10, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
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.
The Codex has not established a MRL
for metamitron, and therefore,
harmonization is not an issue at this
time.
VI. Conclusion
Therefore, a time-limited tolerance is
established for residues of metamitron,
(4-amino-3-methyl-6-phenyl-1,2,4triazin-5(4H)-one), in or on the RAC
beet, sugar, roots at 0.01 ppm. This
tolerance expires on December 31, 2027.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action establishes a tolerance
under FFDCA sections 408(e) and
408(l)(6). 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:36 Jul 09, 2024
Jkt 262001
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
Since tolerances and exemptions that
are established in accordance with
FFDCA sections 408(e) and 408(l)(6),
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).
Register. This action is not a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: June 28, 2024.
Edward Messina,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the
preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR
chapter I as follows:
PART 180—TOLERANCES AND
EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE
CHEMICAL RESIDUES IN FOOD
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
2. Add § 180.726 to subpart C to read
as follows:
■
§ 180.726 Metamitron; tolerances for
residues.
(a) [Reserved]
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.
Time-limited tolerances are established
for residues of the herbicide
metamitron, including its metabolites
and degradates, in or on the specified
agricultural commodities to table 1 to
this paragraph (b), resulting from use of
the pesticide pursuant to FIFRA section
18 emergency exemptions. Compliance
with the tolerance levels specified in
table 1 to this paragraph (b) is to be
determined by measuring residues of
metamitron (4-amino-3-methyl-6phenyl-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-one) in or on
the listed commodities. The tolerances
expire on the dates specified in table 1
to this paragraph (b).
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (b)
VIII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will
submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
Commodity
Parts per
million
Expiration/
revocation
date
Beet, sugar, roots
0.01
12/31/2027
(c)–(d) [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2024–15067 Filed 7–9–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\10JYR1.SGM
10JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 132 (Wednesday, July 10, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56669-56673]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-15067]
[[Page 56669]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA-HQ-OPP-2024-0221; FRL-12054-01-OCSPP]
Metamitron; Pesticide Tolerance for Emergency Exemptions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a time-limited tolerance for
residues of metamitron in or on the raw agricultural commodity (RAC)
beet, sugar, roots. This action is in response to EPA's granting of
emergency exemptions under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) authorizing use of the pesticide on the crop,
sugar beets. This regulation establishes a maximum permissible level
for residues of metamitron in or on the RAC beet, sugar, roots. The
time-limited tolerance expires on December 31, 2027.
DATES: This regulation is effective July 10, 2024. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before September 9, 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-2024-0221, 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 Docket
Public Reading Room 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).
Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 180 through the Office of the Federal Register's e-CFR site at
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?
Under section 408(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), 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-
2024-0221 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 September 9, 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-2024-0221, 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. Background and Statutory Findings
EPA, on its own initiative, in accordance with FFDCA sections
408(e) and 408(l)(6) of, 21 U.S.C. 346a(e) and 346a(1)(6), is
establishing a time-limited tolerance for combined residues of
metamitron, (4-amino-3-methyl-6-phenyl-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-one),
including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the RAC beet, sugar,
roots at 0.01 parts per million (ppm). This time-limited tolerance
expires on December 31, 2027.
Section 408(l)(6) of FFDCA requires EPA to establish a time-limited
tolerance or exemption from the requirement for a tolerance for
pesticide chemical residues in food that will result from the use of a
pesticide under an emergency exemption granted by EPA under FIFRA
section 18. Such tolerances can be established without providing notice
or period for public comment. EPA does not intend for its actions on
FIFRA section 18 related time-limited tolerances to set binding
precedents for the application of FFDCA section 408 and the safety
standard to other tolerances and exemptions. Section 408(e) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance or an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance on its own initiative, i.e., without having
received any petition from an outside party.
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
[[Page 56670]]
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.''
Section 18 of FIFRA authorizes EPA to exempt any Federal or State
agency from any provision of FIFRA, if EPA determines that ``emergency
conditions exist which require such exemption.'' EPA has established
regulations governing such emergency exemptions in 40 CFR part 166.
III. Emergency Exemptions for Metamitron on Sugar Beets and FFDCA
Tolerances
The Colorado and Nebraska Departments of Agriculture requested
emergency exemptions for use of metamitron on the crop sugar beets to
control problematic weed populations of Palmar amaranth, that are not
controlled by the available registered pesticides, stating that
significant economic losses would be suffered without adequate control
of this weed. After having reviewed the submissions, EPA determined
that emergency conditions exist for Colorado and Nebraska, and that the
criteria for approval of the emergency exemptions were met. EPA has
authorized specific exemptions under FIFRA section 18 for the use of
metamitron on sugar beets for control of Palmer amaranth in Colorado
and Nebraska.
As part of its evaluation of the emergency exemption applications,
EPA assessed the potential risks presented by residues of metamitron in
or on the RAC beet, sugar, roots. In doing so, EPA considered the
safety standard in FFDCA section 408(b)(2), and EPA decided that the
necessary tolerance under FFDCA section 408(l)(6) would be consistent
with the safety standard and with FIFRA section 18. Consistent with the
need to move quickly on the emergency exemptions in order to address an
urgent non-routine situation and to ensure that the resulting food is
safe and lawful, EPA is issuing this tolerance without notice and
opportunity for public comment as provided in FFDCA section 408(l)(6).
Although this time-limited tolerance expires on December 31, 2027,
under FFDCA section 408(l)(5), residues of the pesticide not in excess
of the amount specified in the tolerance remaining in or on beet,
sugar, roots after that date will not be unlawful, provided the
pesticide was applied in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA, and the
residues do not exceed a level that was authorized by this time-limited
tolerance at the time of that application. EPA will take action to
revoke this time-limited tolerance earlier if any experience with,
scientific data on, or other relevant information on this pesticide
indicate that the residues are not safe.
Because this time-limited tolerance is being approved under
emergency conditions, EPA has not made any decisions about whether
metamitron meets FIFRA's registration requirements for use on the crop
sugar beets or whether permanent tolerances for this use would be
appropriate. Under these circumstances, EPA does not believe that this
time-limited tolerance decision serves as a basis for registration of
metamitron by a State for special local needs under FIFRA section
24(c). Nor does this tolerance by itself serve as the authority for
persons in any State other than Colorado and Nebraska to use this
pesticide on the applicable crops under FIFRA section 18 absent the
issuance of an emergency exemption applicable within that State. For
additional information regarding the emergency exemptions for
metamitron, contact the Agency's Registration Division at the address
provided under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
IV. 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 the factors specified in FFDCA section
408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other
relevant information in support of this action. EPA has sufficient data
to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on aggregate
exposure expected as a result of the emergency exemption requests and
the time-limited tolerance for residues of metamitron in or on the RAC
beet, sugar, roots at 0.01 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks
associated with establishing the time-limited tolerance follows.
A. 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/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.
Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the
adverse effects caused by metamitron as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at https://www.regulations.gov in the document ``Metamitron. Human Health Risk
Assessment for Section 18 Emergency Exemptions for Use on Sugar Beets
in Colorado and Nebraska'' hereinafter referred to as ``Metamitron
Human Health Risk Assessment'' in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2024-
0221. A summary of the toxicological endpoints for metamitron used for
human risk assessment can be found in this document on pages 22-24.
[[Page 56671]]
B. Exposure Assessment
1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary
exposure to metamitron, EPA considered exposure under the time-limited
tolerance established by this action. EPA assessed dietary exposures
from metamitron 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.
Such effects were identified for metamitron. In estimating acute
dietary exposure, EPA used food consumption information from the 2005-
2010 U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to
residue levels in food, EPA used the highest anticipated combined
residue levels in sugar beet roots from field trials (for metamitron
and its metabolite desamino-metamitron), a default processing factor of
1 for processing sugar beet roots into molasses and assumed 100 percent
crop treated (PCT). The EPA is concerned when dietary risk exceeds 100%
of the acute population adjustment dose (aPAD). The acute dietary (food
and drinking water) exposure and risk estimates were not of concern for
the general U.S. population and all population subgroups (i.e., all
risk estimates were <100% of the aPAD) at the 95th percentile. Risk
estimates for both the general U.S. population and the most highly
exposed population (all infants, <1 year old) are <=5.5% of the aPAD.
ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the 2005-2010 U.S.
Department of Agriculture's National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in
food, EPA used the highest anticipated combined residue levels from
field trials (for metamitron and its metabolite desamino-metamitron), a
default processing factor of 1 for molasses, and assumed 100 percent
crop treated (PCT). For chronic assessments, the EPA is concerned when
dietary risk exceeds 100% of the chronic population adjustment dose
(cPAD). The resulting chronic (food and drinking water) risk estimates
are not of concern (<100% of the cPAD) for the general U.S. population
and all population subgroups. Risk estimates for both the general U.S.
population and the most highly exposed population subgroup (all
infants, <1 year old) are <=4.0% of the cPAD.
iii. Cancer. Based on the data found in the Metamitron Human Health
Risk Assessment, referenced in Unit IV.A., EPA has concluded that
metamitron does not pose a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a dietary
exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is
unnecessary.
iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (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 this tolerance.
2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk
assessment for metamitron in drinking water. These simulation models
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport
characteristics of metamitron. 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.
Based on the Pesticide Water Calculator (PWC) model (ver. 2.001)
and updated drinking water scenarios, the estimated drinking water
concentrations (EDWCs) of metamitron are 91 ppb parts per billion (ppb)
for acute exposures, and 48 ppb for chronic exposures (non-cancer
assessments). Both EDWCs are based upon surface water modelling, which
resulted in higher EDWCs (worst case, more conservative) than those
from ground water models. The modeled EDWCs were directly entered into
the dietary exposure models used for estimating exposures from drinking
water (91 ppb for acute exposures and 48 ppb for chronic exposures).
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). Metamitron is not
registered for any specific use patterns that would result in
residential exposure.
Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic
inputs for residential exposures may be found at: https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/standard-operating-procedures-residential-pesticide.
4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
EPA has not found metamitron to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and metamitron does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that
metamitron does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.
C. 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 (FQPA) Safety Factor (SF). In applying this provision,
EPA either retains the default value of 10X, or uses a different
additional SF when reliable data available to EPA support the choice of
a different factor.
2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no evidence of
increased susceptibility following in utero exposure to metamitron in
either the rat or rabbit developmental toxicity studies up to the
highest doses tested, and there is no evidence of increased
quantitative susceptibility following in utero and/or pre-/post-natal
exposure in the multi-
[[Page 56672]]
generation reproduction studies in rats. All offspring effects were
observed at the same or higher dose level than maternal toxicity.
Evidence of qualitative sensitivity was demonstrated in a
multigeneration reproductive toxicity study, as decreased offspring
survival was observed in the absence of comparable parental toxicity.
However, the concern is low as the sensitivity was observed at a higher
dose level than the established LOAEL/NOAEL for the parental
generation, a clear NOAEL/LOAEL has been established for the offspring
generation, and all selected endpoints are protective of the
qualitative sensitivity.
Reduction of the 10X FQPA SF to 1X is appropriate as the database
is complete, no quantitative susceptibility was observed, the concern
for qualitative sensitivity in a multigeneration reproductive toxicity
study is low as it was observed at a higher dose level than the
established parental NOAEL/LOAEL within the study, the current PODs are
protective of the sensitivity, and clear NOAELs/LOAELs have been
established across the database.
3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show that the
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following
findings:
i. The toxicity database for metamitron is complete and adequate
for hazard characterization, toxicity endpoint selection, and FQPA SF
consideration.
ii. Neurotoxicity (clinical signs and functional observational
battery (FOB) findings) was observed in two non-guideline studies
following an acute exposure (single dose) in both mice and rats. In a
metabolism study, reduced mobility and piloerection were observed after
a single oral dose, but the effects resolved within 24 hours post-
dosage. No additional potentially neurotoxic effects were observed
across the metamitron database, including the rat subchronic
neurotoxicity study (SCN), at the doses tested. The concern for
neurotoxicity is low, as all selected PODs are protective of the
adverse effects identified in the non-guideline studies and the
metabolism study. Therefore, there is no need for a developmental
neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
iii. There is no evidence that metamitron results in increased
quantitative susceptibility after in utero exposure to rats or rabbits
in the prenatal developmental studies. The concern for qualitative
sensitivity in the multigeneration reproduction study is low as it was
observed at a higher dose level than the established parental NOAEL/
LOAEL within the study, the current PODs are protective of the
sensitivity, and clear NOAELs/LOAELs have been established across the
database.
iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based
on 100% CT and anticipated residues based on crop field trials with all
residues below the limit of quantitation for metamitron. The limit of
detection was used, and standard processing factors applied to estimate
residues in molasses. EPA made conservative (protective) assumptions in
the ground and surface water modeling used to assess exposure to
metamitron in drinking water. These assessments will not underestimate
the exposure and risks posed by metamitron.
D. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water,
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an
adequate MOE exists. Since there are no residential exposure scenarios,
aggregate exposure and risk are equivalent to the acute and chronic
dietary (food and drinking water) exposure and risk, which are not of
concern.
1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this
document for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food and
water to metamitron will occupy 5.5% of the aPAD for all infants, the
population group receiving the greatest exposure.
2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to
metamitron from food and water will utilize 4.0% of the cPAD for all
infants, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.
3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Metamitron is
not registered for uses that could result in short-term residential
exposure. Because there is no short-term residential exposure and
chronic dietary exposure has already been assessed under the
appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as the
POD used to assess short-term risk), no further assessment of short-
term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk
assessment for evaluating short-term risk for metamitron.
4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure
takes into account intermediate-term non-dietary, non-occupational
exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a
background exposure level). Metamitron is not registered for any use
patterns that would result in intermediate-term residential exposure.
Because there is no intermediate-term residential exposure and chronic
dietary exposure has already been assessed under the appropriately
protective cPAD (which is at least as protective as the POD used to
assess intermediate-term risk), no further assessment of intermediate-
term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk
assessment for evaluating intermediate-term risk for metamitron.
5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies
and the low concern for mutagenic potential, metamitron is not expected
to pose a cancer risk to humans.
6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to the general population, or to infants and children, from aggregate
exposure to metamitron residues.
V. Other Considerations
A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
Adequate enforcement methodology (high-performance liquid
chromatography method with tandem mass spectrometry detection (LC/MS/
MS), Method SGS-17-01-03), is available to enforce the tolerance
expression. 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
[[Page 56673]]
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.
The Codex has not established a MRL for metamitron, and therefore,
harmonization is not an issue at this time.
VI. Conclusion
Therefore, a time-limited tolerance is established for residues of
metamitron, (4-amino-3-methyl-6-phenyl-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-one), in or
on the RAC beet, sugar, roots at 0.01 ppm. This tolerance expires on
December 31, 2027.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action establishes a tolerance under FFDCA sections 408(e) and
408(l)(6). 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 in accordance
with FFDCA sections 408(e) and 408(l)(6), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
Tribal governments, on the relationship between the National Government
and the States or Tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999), and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), do not apply to this action. In addition,
this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
VIII. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 28, 2024.
Edward Messina,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending
40 CFR chapter I as follows:
PART 180--TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES
IN FOOD
0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
0
2. Add Sec. 180.726 to subpart C to read as follows:
Sec. 180.726 Metamitron; tolerances for residues.
(a) [Reserved]
(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. Time-limited tolerances are
established for residues of the herbicide metamitron, including its
metabolites and degradates, in or on the specified agricultural
commodities to table 1 to this paragraph (b), resulting from use of the
pesticide pursuant to FIFRA section 18 emergency exemptions. Compliance
with the tolerance levels specified in table 1 to this paragraph (b) is
to be determined by measuring residues of metamitron (4-amino-3-methyl-
6-phenyl-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-one) in or on the listed commodities. The
tolerances expire on the dates specified in table 1 to this paragraph
(b).
Table 1 to Paragraph (b)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expiration/
Commodity Parts per revocation
million date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beet, sugar, roots........................... 0.01 12/31/2027
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c)-(d) [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2024-15067 Filed 7-9-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P