99-9711. Diflubenzuron; Pesticide Tolerances  

  • [Federal Register Volume 64, Number 74 (Monday, April 19, 1999)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 19050-19057]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 99-9711]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 180
    
    [OPP-300844; FRL-6075-4]
    RIN 2070-AB78
    
    
    Diflubenzuron; Pesticide Tolerances
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of the 
    insecticide diflubenzuron (N-[[4-chlorophenyl)amino]-carbonyl]-2,6-
    difluorobenzamide) and its metabolites, 4-chlorophenylurea (CPU) and 4-
    chloroaniline (PCA) in/on rice grain at 0.02 ppm and rice straw at 0.8 
    ppm. Uniroyal Chemical Company, Inc. submitted a petition to EPA under 
    the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the 
    Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 requesting these tolerances.
    
    DATES: This regulation is effective April 19, 1999. Objections and 
    requests for hearings must be received by EPA on or before June 18, 
    1999.
    
    ADDRESSES: Written objections and hearing requests, identified by the 
    docket control number, [OPP-300844], must be submitted to: Hearing 
    Clerk (1900), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St., 
    SW., Washington, DC 20460. Fees accompanying objections and hearing 
    requests shall be labeled ``Tolerance Petition Fees'' and forwarded to: 
    EPA Headquarters Accounting Operations Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees), 
    P.O. Box 360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. A copy of any objections and 
    hearing requests filed with the Hearing Clerk identified by the docket 
    control number, [OPP-300844], must also be submitted to: Public 
    Information and Records Integrity Branch, Information Resources and 
    Services Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental 
    Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. In person, 
    bring a copy of objections and hearing requests to Rm. 119, CM #2, 1921 
    Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA.
        A copy of objections and hearing requests filed with the Hearing 
    Clerk may also be submitted electronically by sending electronic mail 
    (e-mail) to: opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov. Copies of objections and 
    hearing requests must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of 
    special characters and any form of encryption. Copies of objections and 
    hearing requests will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect 5.1 file 
    format or ASCII file format. All copies of objections and hearing 
    requests in electronic form must be identified by the docket control 
    number [OPP-300844]. No Confidential Business Information (CBI) should 
    be submitted through e-mail. Electronic copies of objections and 
    hearing requests on this rule may be filed online at many Federal 
    Depository Libraries.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail: Rita Kumar, Registration 
    Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental 
    Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. Office 
    location, telephone number, and e-mail address: Crystal Mall #2, 1921 
    Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, (703) 308-8291, e-mail: 
    kumar.rita@epa.gov.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of February 25, 1998 
    (63 FR 9528) (FRL-5775-3), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408 
    of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(e) 
    announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 6G4771) from Uniroyal 
    Chemical Company, Inc., Bethany, CT proposing to amend 40 CFR part 180 
    by establishing a tolerance for residues of the insect growth 
    regulator, diflubenzuron and metabolites convertible to p-
    chloroaniline, expressed as diflubenzuron in or on rice at 0.02 parts 
    per million (ppm) and rice straw at 0.8 ppm. The notice included a 
    summary of the petition prepared by Uniroyal Chemical Company, Inc., 
    the registrant. In the Federal Register of March 9, 1998 (63 FR 11445) 
    (FRL-5777-8), a clarification of the notice of filing was published 
    explaining that Uniroyal had submitted two petitions, 6G4771, for the 
    establishment of a temporary tolerance in or on rice at 0.01 ppm in 
    association with a 3,000 acre Experimental Use Permit, and 8F4925, to 
    amend 40 CFR 180.377 to include a permanent tolerance for residues of 
    the insect growth regulator, diflubenzuron and metabolites convertible 
    to p-chloroaniline, expressed as diflubenzuron in or on rice at 0.02 
    parts per million (ppm) and rice straw at 0.8 ppm. There were no 
    comments received in response to the notice of filing or the 
    clarification.
    
    I. Background and Statutory Findings
    
         Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of the 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) 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) 
    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
    
    [[Page 19051]]
    
    exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . . .''
        EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risk from 
    aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the 
    regulatory requirements of section 408 and a complete description of 
    the risk assessment process, see the Final Rule on Bifenthrin Pesticide 
    Tolerances (62 FR 62961, November 26, 1997) (FRL-5754-7).
    
    II. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety
    
        Consistent with 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 residues 
    of the insecticide diflubenzuron (N-[[4-chlorophenyl)amino]-carbonyl]-
    2,6-difluorobenzamide) and its metabolites, 4-chlorophenylurea (CPU) 
    and 4-chloroaniline (PCA) on rice grain at 0.02 parts per million (ppm) 
    and rice straw at 0.8 ppm, and to make a determination on aggregate 
    exposure, consistent with section 408(b)(2), for a tolerance for 
    residues of the insecticide diflubenzuron (N-[[4-chlorophenyl)amino]-
    carbonyl]-2,6-difluorobenzamide) and its metabolites, 4-
    chlorophenylurea (CPU) and 4-chloroaniline (PCA) on rice grain at 0.02 
    ppm and rice straw at 0.8 ppm. EPA's assessment of the dietary 
    exposures and risks associated with establishing the tolerance follows.
    
    A. Toxicological Profile
    
        EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its 
    validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of 
    the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered 
    available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities 
    of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and 
    children. The nature of the toxic effects caused by diflubenzuron (N-
    [[4-chlorophenyl)amino]-carbonyl]-2,6-difluorobenzamide) and its 
    metabolites, 4-chlorophenylurea (CPU) and 4-chloroaniline (PCA) on rice 
    grain at 0.02 ppm and rice straw at 0.8 ppm have been fully described 
    in the Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) document (EPA 738-R-
    97-008, August 1997), a copy of which is in the public docket.
    
    B. Toxicological Endpoints
    
        1. Acute toxicity. A risk assessment for acute dietary exposure (1 
    day) is not necessary. One day single dose oral studies in rats and 
    mice indicated only marginal effects on methemoglobin levels at a dose 
    level of 10,000 milligrams/kilograms (mg/kg) of diflubenzuron.
        2. Short- and intermediate-term toxicity. The toxicology endpoint 
    for short-term occupational or residential exposure (1 to 7 days) is 
    sulfhemoglobinemia observed in the 14-day subchronic oral study in mice 
    dosed with technical grade diflubenzuron. The no observed effect level 
    (NOEL) in this study was 40 mg/kg/day and the lowest effect level (LEL) 
    was 200 mg/kg/day.
        The toxicology endpoint for intermediate-term occupational or 
    residential exposure (1 week to several months) is methemoglobinemia 
    observed in the 13-week subchronic feeding study in dogs. For the 
    purpose of risk assessments, the NOEL of 1.64 mg/kg/day in this study 
    should be considered to be 2 mg/kg/day so as to be consistent with the 
    NOEL of 2 mg/kg/day in the chronic study used to calculate the RfD. The 
    LEL in this study was 6.24 mg/kg/day. Since an oral NOAEL was selected 
    for a dermal endpoint, a dermal absorption factor of 0.5% should be 
    used for this risk assessment when converting dermal exposure to oral 
    equivalents. Therefore, the dermal equivalent dose producing a NOAEL by 
    the oral route is 400.0 mg/kg/day (i.e., 2.0 mg/kg/day divided by 0.005 
    = 400.0 mg/kg/day).
        3. Chronic toxicity. The RfD was determined to be 0.02 mg/kg/day 
    and is based on the NOEL of 2.0 mg/kg/day in the 52-week chronic oral 
    study in dogs. Increases in methemoglobin and sulfhemoglobin were 
    observed at the next higher dose level of 10.0 mg/kg/day. An 
    uncertainty factor of 100 was applied to account for the interspecies 
    extrapolation and intraspecies variability. Diflubenzuron has been 
    reviewed by the FAO/WHO joint committee on pesticide residues and an 
    Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) of 0.02 mg/kg/day was established in 
    1985. The ADI was based upon the 1 year oral toxicity study in dogs 
    with a NOEL of 2.0 mg/kg/day. A safety factor of 100 was applied to 
    account for the interspecies extrapolation and intraspecies 
    variability.
        4. Carcinogenicity. Based on the available evidence, which included 
    adequate carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice and a battery of 
    negative mutagenicity studies, diflubenzuron per se has been classified 
    as Group E (evidence of non-carcinogenicity for humans). However, p-
    chloroaniline (PCA), a metabolite of diflubenzuron, was classified as a 
    Group B2 carcinogen (probable human carcinogen). The classification for 
    PCA was based on the results of a National Toxicology Program (NTP) 
    study reported in July 1989, in which p-chloroaniline hydrochloride was 
    administered by gavage to rats and mice for 2 years. In rats, clearly 
    increased incidences of uncommon sarcomas (fibrosarcomas, 
    hemangiosarcomas and/or osteosarcomas) of the spleen were observed in 
    males. In females, two additional sarcomas of the spleen were also 
    found. Pheochromocytomas of the adrenal gland may also have been 
    associated with the test material in male and female rats. In mice, 
    increased incidences of hepatocellular neoplasms in the liver and of 
    hemangiosarcomas in the spleen and/or liver were observed in males. In 
    females, no evidence of carcinogenic activity was observed. The results 
    of several mutagenicity studies on PCA were also included in the same 
    NTP report. PCA was mutagenic in Salmonella strains TA98 and TA100 with 
    metabolic activation. Gene mutations were induced by PCA in cultured 
    mouse lymphoma cells with and without metabolic activation. In cultured 
    Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells, treatment with PCA produced 
    significant increases in sister chromatid exchanges (SCEs) with and 
    without metabolic activation. Chromosomal aberrations were also 
    significantly increased in CHO cells in the presence of metabolic 
    activation.
        For the purpose of calculating dietary risk assessments, the 
    following procedure was used:
        a. P-chlorophenylurea (CPU) and p-chloroacetanilide (PCAA), 
    additional metabolites of diflubenzuron that are closely related to PCA 
    and for which there are no adequate carcinogenicity data available, 
    should be considered to be potentially carcinogenic and to have the 
    same carcinogenic potency (Q1*) as PCA.
        b. The sum of PCA, CPU, and PCAA residues in ingested food should 
    be used to estimate the dietary exposure of humans to the carcinogenic 
    metabolites of diflubenzuron.
        c. In addition to ingested residues of these three metabolites, 
    amounts of PCA, CPU, and/or PCAA formed in vivo following ingestion of 
    diflubenzuron should also be included when estimating the total 
    exposure of humans to the carcinogenic metabolites of diflubenzuron. 
    The in vivo conversion of ingested diflubenzuron to PCA and/or CPU was 
    estimated to be 2.0%, based on data in the rat metabolism study.
        The Q1* (estimated unit risk) for PCA, based upon spleen sarcoma 
    rates in male rats, was calculated to be 6.38 x 10-2 (mg/kg/
    day)-1 in human equivalents.
    
    [[Page 19052]]
    
        It has been determined that PCAA does not occur in animal or plant 
    tissues in significant amounts.
        5. Special sensitivity to infants and children. In assessing the 
    potential for additional sensitivity of infants and children to 
    residues of diflubenzuron, EPA considered data from developmental 
    toxicity studies in the rat and rabbit and a 2-generation reproductive 
    toxicity study in the rat. Developmental toxicity studies are designed 
    to evaluate adverse effects on the developing fetus resulting from 
    maternal pesticide exposure during gestation. Reproductive toxicity 
    studies provide information relating to pre- and post-natal effects 
    from exposure to the pesticide, information on the reproductive 
    capability of mating animals, and data on systemic toxicity.
        FFDCA section 408 provides that EPA shall apply an additional 10-
    fold margin of safety for infants and children in the case of threshold 
    effects to account for pre- and post-natal toxicity and the 
    completeness of the data base unless EPA determines that a different 
    margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. Margins of 
    safety are incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly 
    through use of a margin of exposure analysis or through using 
    uncertainty (safety) factors in calculating a dose level that poses no 
    appreciable risk to humans. In either case, EPA generally defines the 
    level of appreciable risk as exposure that is greater than 1/100 of the 
    NOEL in the animal study appropriate to the particular risk assessment. 
    This 100-fold uncertainty (safety) factor/margin of exposure (safety) 
    is designed to account for inter-species extrapolation and intra-
    species variability. EPA believes that reliable data support using the 
    100-fold margin/factor, rather than the 1,000-fold margin/factor, when 
    EPA has a complete data base under existing guidelines, and when the 
    severity of the effect in infants or children, the potency or unusual 
    toxic properties of a compound, or the quality of the exposure data do 
    not raise concerns regarding the adequacy of the standard margin/
    factor.
        a. Developmental toxicity studies--i. Rats. In the developmental 
    study in rats, the maternal (systemic) NOEL was 1,000.0 mg/kg/day 
    [HDT]. The developmental (fetal) NOEL was 1,000.0 mg/kg/day, [HDT].
        ii. Rabbits. In the developmental toxicity study in rabbits, the 
    maternal (systemic) NOEL was 1,000.0 mg/kg/day, [HDT]. The 
    developmental (pup) NOEL was 1,000.0 mg/kg/day, [HDT].
        b. Reproductive toxicity studies. In the 2-generation reproductive 
    toxicity study in rats, the maternal (systemic) NOEL was <36><42 females="" [ldt]="" based="" on="" hematological="" effects="" at="" all="" dose="" levels="" tested.="" the="" reproductive="" (pup)="" noel="" was="" 427.0="" mg/kg/day,="" based="" on="" decreases="" in="" the="" f-1="" pup="" weight="" at="" the="" lel="" of="" 2,454.0="" mg/kg/day="" [hdt].="" c.="" pre-="" and="" post-natal="" sensitivity.="" the="" toxicological="" data="" base="" for="" evaluating="" pre-="" and="" post-natal="" toxicity="" for="" diflubenzuron="" is="" complete="" with="" respect="" to="" current="" data="" requirements.="" based="" on="" the="" developmental="" and="" reproductive="" toxicity="" studies="" discussed="" above,="" for="" diflubenzuron="" there="" does="" not="" appear="" to="" be="" an="" extra="" sensitivity="" for="" pre-="" or="" post-natal="" effects.="" based="" on="" the="" above,="" epa="" concludes="" that="" reliable="" data="" support="" use="" of="" a="" 100-fold="" margin="" of="" exposure/uncertainty="" factor,="" rather="" than="" the="" 1,000-fold="" margin/factor,="" to="" protect="" infants="" and="" children.="" c.="" exposures="" and="" risks="" 1.="" from="" food="" and="" feed="" uses.="" tolerances="" have="" been="" established="" (40="" cfr="" 180.377)="" for="" residues="" of="" diflubenzuron="" per="" se,="" in="" or="" on="" citrus,="" artichokes,="" walnuts,="" mushrooms,="" cottonseed,="" soybean,="" and="" associated="" livestock="" commodities.="" existing="" tolerances="" range="" from="" 0.05="" ppm="" in/on="" soybeans="" to="" 6.0="" ppm="" in/on="" artichokes.="" tolerances="" of="" 0.05="" ppm="" have="" also="" been="" established="" for="" residues="" of="" diflubenzuron="" in="" animal="" commodities.="" for="" the="" dietary="" risk="" assessment,="" anticipated="" residues="" levels="" were="" calculated="" in="" livestock,="" citrus="" and="" mushroom="" commodities.="" anticipated="" residue="" estimates="" for="" diflubenzuron="" were="" not="" calculated="" for="" other="" raw="" agricultural="" commodities.="" percent="" crop="" treated="" data="" were="" utilized="" where="" available.="" section="" 408(b)(2)(f)="" states="" that="" the="" agency="" may="" use="" data="" on="" the="" actual="" percent="" of="" food="" treated="" for="" assessing="" chronic="" dietary="" risk="" only="" if="" the="" agency="" can="" make="" the="" following="" findings:="" (1)="" that="" the="" data="" used="" are="" reliable="" and="" provide="" a="" valid="" basis="" for="" showing="" the="" percentage="" of="" food="" derived="" from="" a="" crop="" that="" is="" likely="" to="" contain="" residues;="" (2)="" that="" the="" exposure="" estimate="" does="" not="" underestimate="" the="" exposure="" for="" any="" significant="" subpopulation="" and;="" (3)="" where="" data="" on="" regional="" pesticide="" use="" and="" food="" consumption="" are="" available,="" that="" the="" exposure="" estimate="" does="" not="" understate="" exposure="" for="" any="" regional="" population.="" in="" addition,="" the="" agency="" must="" provide="" for="" periodic="" evaluation="" of="" any="" estimates="" used.="" to="" provide="" for="" the="" periodic="" evaluation="" of="" these="" estimates="" of="" percent="" crop="" treated="" as="" required="" by="" section="" 408(b)(2)(f),="" epa="" may="" require="" registrants="" to="" submit="" data="" on="" percent="" crop="" treated.="" dietary="" exposure="" estimates="" were="" based="" on="" the="" following="" percent="" crop="" treated="" estimates:="" grass/rangeland,="" 1%;="" cottonseed,="" 3%;="" grapefruit,="" 8%;="" mushrooms,="" 3.1%;="" oranges,="" 2%;="" tangerines,="" 4%;="" soybean,="" 1%;="" cattle="" bolus,="" 5%.="" other="" commodities="" were="" assumed="" to="" be="" 100%="" treated.="" the="" agency="" believes="" that="" the="" three="" conditions="" listed="" above="" have="" been="" met.="" with="" respect="" to="" (1),="" epa="" finds="" that="" the="" percent="" crop="" treated="" information="" described="" above="" for="" diflubenzuron="" is="" reliable="" and="" has="" a="" valid="" basis.="" the="" agency="" has="" utilized="" statistical="" data="" from="" public="" and="" proprietary="" sources,="" including="" doane,="" and="" checked="" these="" against="" data="" provided="" by="" the="" registrant.="" these="" are="" the="" best="" available="" sources="" for="" such="" information.="" concerning="" (2)="" and="" (3),="" regional="" consumption="" information="" and="" consumption="" information="" for="" significant="" subpopulations="" is="" taken="" into="" account="" through="" epa's="" computer-based="" model="" for="" evaluating="" the="" exposure="" of="" significant="" subpopulations="" including="" several="" regional="" groups.="" use="" of="" this="" consumption="" information="" in="" epa's="" risk="" assessment="" process="" ensures="" that="" epa's="" exposure="" estimate="" does="" not="" understate="" exposure="" for="" any="" significant="" subpopulation="" group="" and="" allows="" the="" agency="" to="" be="" reasonably="" certain="" that="" no="" regional="" population="" is="" exposed="" to="" residue="" levels="" higher="" than="" those="" estimated="" by="" the="" agency.="" other="" than="" data="" available="" through="" national="" food="" consumption="" surveys,="" epa="" does="" not="" have="" available="" information="" on="" the="" consumption="" of="" food="" bearing="" diflubenzuron="" in="" a="" particular="" area.="" risk="" assessments="" were="" conducted="" as="" follows:="" a.="" acute="" exposure="" and="" risk.="" a="" risk="" assessment="" for="" acute="" dietary="" exposure="" (1="" day)="" is="" not="" necessary.="" one="" day="" single="" dose="" oral="" studies="" in="" rats="" and="" mice="" indicated="" only="" marginal="" effects="" on="" methemoglobin="" levels="" at="" a="" dose="" level="" of="" 10,000="" mg/kg="" of="" diflubenzuron.="" b.="" chronic="" exposure="" and="" risk.="" a="" chronic="" dietary="" risk="" assessment="" is="" required="" for="" diflubenzuron.="" the="" rfd="" used="" for="" the="" chronic="" dietary="" analysis="" for="" diflubenzuron="" is="" 0.02="" mg/kg="" bwt/day.="" the="" chronic="" deem="" analysis="" used="" mean="" consumption="" (3-day="" average).="" anticipated="" residues="" and="" percent="" crop="" treated="" information="" for="" select="" commodities="" were="" used.="" since="" epa="" determined="" to="" reduce="" the="" 10x="" factor="" to="" 1x,="" the="" population="" adjusted="" dose="" (pad)="" and="" the="" rfd="" are="" the="" same.="" therefore,="" epa's="" level="" of="" concern="" are="" values="">100% RfD. Dietary exposures for the U.S. general 
    population and other subgroups at percentage of RfD are presented 
    below. The other subgroups included represent the highest dietary
    
    [[Page 19053]]
    
    exposures for their respective subgroups (i.e., children, females, and 
    the other general population subgroup higher than U.S. population).
    
     
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Exposure (mg/kg/
                Subgroups                    %RfD                day)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    U.S. population (48 states)       <1% 0.000027="" non-hispanic="" others=""><1% 0.000102="" non-nursing="" infants=""><1 year=""><1% 0.000031="" old)="" females="" (20+="" years,="" not=""><1% 0.000032="" pregnant,="" not="" nursing)="" ------------------------------------------------------------------------="" the="" u.s.="" population="" and="" all="" the="" deem="" subgroups="" have="" arcs="" for="" chronic="" dietary="" (non-cancer)="" risk="" from="" diflubenzuron="" well="" below="" the="" rfd="" when="" all="" uses="" are="" considered.="" c.="" cancer="" risk="" from="" consumption="" of="" pca="" and="" related="" metabolites.="" the="" agency="" has="" determined="" that="" there="" are="" three="" possible="" sources="" for="" dietary="" exposure="" to="" pca="" and="" related="" compounds="" (cpu="" and="" pcaa):="" residues="" in="" plants/fungi="" (mushrooms),="" residues="" in="" animal="" commodities="" (milk="" and="" liver)="" and="" in="" vivo="" conversion="" of="" diflubenzuron.="" i.="" mushrooms/milk/liver.="" the="" agency="" used="" results="" from="" metabolism="" studies="" to="" determine="" the="" percent="" of="" the="" total="" radioactive="" residue="" (trr)="" present="" as="" pca="" and="" related="" compounds="" in="" mushrooms,="" milk="" and="" liver.="" for="" milk="" and="" liver,="" anticipated="" residues="" were="" calculated="" from="" the="" results="" of="" the="" ruminant="" feeding="" study="" using="" tolerance="" level="" residues="" in="" animal="" feed="" items="" and="" adjusting="" for="" percent="" crop="" treated.="" the="" total="" levels="" of="" pca="" and="" related="" compounds="" were="" estimated="" by="" multiplying="" the="" ratio="" of="" pca/dfb="" by="" the="" diflubenzuron="" consumption="" (from="" deem).="" the="" pca="" consumption="" values="" were="" calculated="" as="" follows:="" mushrooms="0.0000062" mg/kg/day="" milk="0.0000004" mg/kg/day="" liver="0.00000002" mg/kg/day="" total="0.00000066" mg/kg/day="" overall="" u.s.:="" 0.0000066="" mg/kg/day="" (4.2="" x="">-7 
    Carcinogenic Risk)
    
        ii.In vivo. Based on the results of a rat metabolism study, an 
    assumption of a 2.0% conversion of diflubenzuron to PCA in humans is 
    assumed for PCA risk assessment. Using the above exposure estimate for 
    rice and published uses (0.000027 mg/kg/day) the carcinogenic risk 
    estimate (overall U.S. population) is 3.4 x 10-8 (0.000027 
    mg/kg/day x 0.02 x 0.0638 (mg/kg/day)-1).
        Total cancer risk estimate for PCA and related metabolites:
        Overall U.S.: 4.5 x 10-7
        This cancer risk does not exceed the level of concern.
        2. From drinking water. EPA has calculated drinking water levels of 
    concern (DWLOCs) for chronic (non-cancer) exposure to diflubenzuron in 
    surface and ground water for the U.S. population and children (1-6 
    yrs). They are 700 and 200 ppb, respectively. For chronic (cancer) 
    exposure to CPU in surface and ground water, the DWLOC is 0.30 ppb for 
    the U.S. population. To calculate the DWLOC for chronic (non-cancer) 
    exposure relative to a chronic toxicity endpoint, the chronic dietary 
    food exposure (from DEEM) was subtracted from the RfD to obtain the 
    acceptable chronic (non-cancer) exposure to diflubenzuron in drinking 
    water. To calculate the DWLOC for chronic exposures relative to a 
    carcinogenic toxicity endpoint, the chronic (cancer) dietary food 
    exposure was subtracted from the ratio of the negligible cancer risk to 
    the Q* to obtain the acceptable chronic (cancer) exposure to 
    diflubenzuron in drinking water. DWLOCs were then calculated using 
    default body weights and drinking water consumption figures.
        a. Chronic risk. Chronic RfD = 0.02 mg/kg/day. Maximum 
    H2O = 0.02 - Food Exposure.
    
     
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Food Exposure to
                                         Diflubenzuron        Maximum H2O
                Subgroup               (from DEEM mg/kg/   Exposure (mg/kg/
                                             day)                day)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    U.S. population                   0.000027            0.01997
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Children (1-6 years)              0.00031             0.01997
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    U.S. Population: DWLOC = 700 ppb
    Children (1-6 years): DWLOC = 200 ppb
    
        b. Cancer risk. Q* = 6.38 x 10-2 (mg/kg/day) -- Maximum 
    H2O = 1.6 x 10-5 - Food Exposure
    
     
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Food Exposure to
                                        PCA and Related       Maximum H2O
                Subgroup               Compounds (mg/kg/   Exposure (mg/kg/
                                             day)                day)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    U.S. population                   0.0000071           0.0000089
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    U.S. population: DWLOC = 0.30 ppb
    
    
    [[Page 19054]]
    
        The PCA and related compounds value is a total of residues in food 
    (0.0000066 mg/kg/day) + residues formed in vivo (0.000027 mg/kg/day DFB 
    x 2% conversion).
        The estimated average concentration of diflubenzuron in surface 
    water sources is not expected to exceed 0.05 ppb. Estimated average 
    concentrations of CPU in surface water sources is not expected to 
    exceed 0.73 ppb. The estimated average concentrations of diflubenzuron 
    in surface water are less than EPA's levels of concern for 
    diflubenzuron in drinking water as a contribution to chronic (non-
    cancer) aggregate exposure. However, the estimated average 
    concentration (0.73 ppb) of CPU in surface water exceeds EPA's levels 
    of concern for CPU in drinking water (0.30 ppb) as a contribution to 
    chronic (cancer) aggregate exposure.
        EPA believes the estimates of CPU exposure in water derived from 
    the PRZM-EXAMS model, particularly the estimates pertaining to chronic 
    exposure, are significantly overstated for several reasons. The PRZM-
    EXAMS model was designed to estimate exposure from ecological risk 
    assessments and thus uses a scenario of a body of water approximating 
    the size of a 1 hectare (2.5 acres) pond. This tends to overstate 
    chronic drinking water exposure levels for the following reasons. 
    First, surface water source drinking water generally comes from bodies 
    of water that are substantially larger than a 1 hectare (2.5 acres) 
    pond. Second, the modeled scenario also assumes that essentially the 
    whole basin receives an application of the pesticide. Yet in virtually 
    all cases, basins large enough to support a drinking water facility 
    will contain a substantial fraction of the area which does not receive 
    pesticide. Third, there is often at least some flow (in a river) or 
    turnover (in a reservoir or lake) of the water so the persistence of 
    the pesticide near the drinking water facility is usually 
    overestimated. Fourth, even assuming a reservoir is directly adjacent 
    to an agricultural field, the agricultural field may not be used to 
    grow a crop on which the pesticide in question is registered for use. 
    Fifth, the PRZM-EXAMS modeled scenario does not take into account 
    reductions in residue-loading due to applications of less than the 
    maximum application rate or no treatment of the crop at all (percent 
    crop treated data). Although there is a high degree of uncertainty to 
    this analysis, these are the best available estimates of concentrations 
    of CPU in drinking water. EPA believes that these numbers justify 
    asking for field runoff monitoring for CPU in conjunction with the 
    registered use on cotton.
        EPA bases this determination on a comparison of estimated 
    concentrations of diflubenzuron and CPU in surface waters and ground 
    waters to back-calculated ``levels of concern'' for diflubenzuron and 
    CPU in drinking water. These levels of concern in drinking water were 
    determined after EPA has considered all other non-occupational human 
    exposures for which it has reliable data, including all current uses, 
    and uses considered in this action. The estimates of diflubenzuron and 
    CPU in surface and ground waters are derived from water quality models 
    that use conservative assumptions (health-protective) regarding the 
    pesticide transport from the point of application to surface and ground 
    water. Because EPA considers the aggregate risk resulting from multiple 
    exposure pathways associated with a pesticide's uses, levels of concern 
    in drinking water may vary as those uses change. If new uses are added 
    in the future, EPA will reassess the potential impacts of diflubenzuron 
    and CPU on drinking water as a part of the aggregate risk assessment 
    process.
        3. From non-occupational non-dietary exposure. Diflubenzuron is a 
    restricted use pesticide and therefore not available for use by 
    homeowners. However, non-agricultural uses of diflubenzuron may expose 
    people in residential locations. Based on the low dermal absorption 
    rate (0.5%), and the extremely low dermal and inhalation toxicity, 
    these uses are expected to result in insignificant risks.
        4. Cumulative exposure to substances with common mechanism of 
    toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) 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.'' An explanation of the current Agency 
    approach to assessment of pesticides with a common mechanism of 
    toxicity may be found in the Final Rule on Bifenthrin Pesticide 
    Tolerances (62 FR 62961).
        Diflubenzuron is structurally similar to other substituted 
    benzoylurea insecticides including triflumuron and flucycloxuron. EPA 
    does not have, at this time, available data to determine whether 
    diflubenzuron has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances 
    or how to include this pesticide in a cumulative risk assessment. 
    Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative risk 
    approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, diflubenzuron does 
    not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. 
    For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not 
    assumed that diflubenzuron has a common mechanism of toxicity with 
    other substances.
    
    D. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety for U.S. Population, 
    Infants, and Children
    
        1. Acute risk. There is no risk from acute dietary exposure (1 day) 
    to diflubenzuron as there is no toxic endpoint identified.
        2. Chronic. For the U.S. population, <1% of="" the="" rfd="" is="" occupied="" by="" food="" exposure.="" the="" estimated="" average="" concentrations="" of="" diflubenzuron="" in="" surface="" and="" ground="" water="" are="" less="" than="" epa's="" levels="" of="" concern="" for="" diflubenzuron="" in="" drinking="" water.="" therefore,="" epa="" concludes="" that="" there="" is="" a="" reasonable="" certainty="" that="" no="" harm="" will="" result="" to="" infants,="" children,="" or="" adults="" from="" chronic="" aggregate="" (food="" plus="" water)="" exposure="" to="" diflubenzuron="" residues.="" 3.="" carcinogenic="" aggregate="" exposure="" and="" risk.="" for="" the="" u.s.="" population,="" cancer="" risk="" resulting="" from="" food="" exposure="" is="" 4.5="" x="">-
    7. The estimated average concentration (0.73 ppb) of CPU in 
    surface water exceeds EPA's levels of concern for CPU in drinking water 
    (0.30 ppb) as a contribution to chronic (cancer) aggregate exposure. 
    However, EPA believes that these PRZM-EXAMS model overestimates 
    exposures for the reasons given above. EPA does not generally use 
    surface water modeling values for quantitative risk assessment. 
    However, due to the statistical uncertainties regarding the 
    significance of cancer risks which are near 1 x 10-6, EPA 
    has calculated that the cancer risk resulting from 0.73 ppb of CPU in 
    drinking water is 1.30 x 10-6. The aggregate cancer risk is 
    thus 1.8 x 10-6 (4.5 x 10-7 for food + 1.3 x 
    10-6 for water).
        4. Determination of safety. EPA believes that the total risk 
    estimate for CPU in food and drinking water of 1.8 x 10-6 
    generally represents a negligible risk, as EPA has traditionally 
    applied that concept. EPA has commonly referred to a negligible risk as 
    one that is at or below 1 in 1 million (1 x 10-6). 
    Quantitative cancer risk assessment is not a precise science. There are 
    a significant number of uncertainties in both the toxicology used to 
    derive the cancer potency of a substance and in the data used to 
    measure and calculate exposure. The Agency does not attach great 
    significance to numerical estimates for carcinogenic risk that differ 
    by approximately a factor of 2.
    
    [[Page 19055]]
    
    III. Other Considerations
    
    A. Metabolism in Plants and Animals
    
        The qualitative nature of the residue in plants is adequately 
    understood based on data from citrus, mushroom, and soybean metabolism 
    studies. The Agency has concluded that tolerances should be expressed 
    in terms of the combined residues of diflubenzuron and metabolites 
    convertible to PCA (CPU and PCAA) expressed as diflubenzuron.
        The nature of the residue in animals is adequately understood based 
    on acceptable poultry and ruminant metabolism studies reflecting oral 
    dosing. Terminal residues identified in animal tissues, milk, and eggs 
    include diflubenzuron, 2-hydroxy-diflubenzuron (2HDFB), 2,6-
    difluorobenzamide (DFBAM), 2,6-difluorobenzoic acid (DFBA), N-(4-
    chlorophenyl)urea (CPU), and PCA. The Agency has concluded that 
    tolerances should be expressed in terms of the combined residues of 
    diflubenzuron and metabolites convertible to PCA (CPU and PCAA) 
    expressed as diflubenzuron.
    
    B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
    
        Adequate methods are available for the analysis of diflubenzuron in 
    rice grain (0.01 ppm), rice straw (0.01 ppm) and water (0.001 ppm). 
    Three enforcement methods for diflubenzuron are published in PAM, Vol. 
    II as Methods I, II, and III. Method II is a GC/ECD method that can 
    separately determine residues of diflubenzuron, CPU, and PCA in eggs, 
    milk, and animal tissues. All three methods have undergone successful 
    Agency validations and are acceptable for enforcement purposes. 
    Individual analytical methods for rice commodities have been submitted 
    for CPU (LOQ of 0.001 ppm in grain, 0.01 ppm in straw) and PCA (LOQ of 
    0.005 ppm in grain and straw). The methods and ILVs have been sent to 
    Beltsville for Petition Method Validation. EPA will withhold a final 
    conclusion on the adequacy of these method as analytical enforcement 
    methods pending receipt of the PMV reports. However, these methods are 
    based on Method II. EPA thus has no objections to a conditional 
    registration while the PMV of the methods for PCA and CPU in rice 
    commodities is performed.
    
    C. Multiresidue Methods
    
        The FDA PESTDATA data base dated January 1, 1994 (PAM Vol. I, 
    Appendix II) contains no information on diflubenzuron recovery using 
    Multiresidue Methods PAM, Vol. I Sections 302, 303, and 304. However, 
    the registrant has submitted Multiresidue testing data that the Agency 
    has forwarded to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Also, the 
    results of Multiresidue Method testing of PCA and CPU have been 
    submitted and will be forwarded to FDA.
    
    D. Storage Stability Data
    
        Data from a 12-month storage stability study were submitted 
    depicting the magnitude of residue of diflubenzuron (DFB) and its 
    metabolites CPU and PCA in/on rice grain, straw, bran and hulls (MRID # 
    44699202). Diflubenzuron was determined to be stable over a 12-month 
    period with average recoveries of 78% (grain), 99% (bran), 89% (straw), 
    and 78% (hulls). CPU exhibited the following average recoveries of a 
    12-month period: 76% (grain), 99% (bran), 89% (straw), and 78% (hulls). 
    Significant declines in the PCA concentration were observed, decreasing 
    rapidly to 56% (average) after 1 month and to 30% (average) after 12 
    months. The storage stability of diflubenzuron and CPU in/on rice 
    commodities have been adequately demonstrated. PCA is unstable, 
    degrading significantly after 1 month. Therefore, for magnitude of 
    residue samples with storage periods greater than 1 month, correction 
    factors must be used in order to determine the residue levels that were 
    present at the time of sample collection.
    
    E. Magnitude of Residues
    
        A total of 14 acceptable field trials have been conducted: Region 
    IV (9 trials), Region VI (2 trials), and Region X (3 trials). EPA 
    requires that a minimum of 16 field trials be performed. The Agency 
    suggests the following distribution for the field trials: Region IV (11 
    trials), Region V (1 trial), Region VI (2 trials), and Region X (2 
    trials) (Residue Chemistry Test Guidelines, OPPTS 860.1500 Crop Field 
    Trials Tables 1 and 6). Additional field trials are thus required in 
    Regions IV (1 trial) and V (1 trial). EPA has decided to issue a 
    conditional registration for the use of diflubenzuron on rice until the 
    necessary field trials are performed.
        Residues of diflubenzuron, CPU and PCA in/on treated rice grain 
    were <0.01 ppm,=""><0.001 -="" 0.002="" ppm="" and=""><0.005 ppm,="" respectively,="" and="" the="" combined="" residues="" were=""><0.016 -=""><0.017 ppm.="" residues="" of="" diflubenzuron,="" cpu="" and="" pca="" in="" treated="" straw="" samples="" were=""><0.01 -="" 0.57="" ppm,=""><0.01 -="" 0.02="" ppm="" and=""><0.005 -="" 0.021="" ppm,="" respectively,="" and="" the="" combined="" residues="" were=""><0.025 -=""><0.607 ppm.="" the="" residue="" data="" support="" the="" proposed="" tolerance="" of="" 0.02="" ppm="" for="" diflubenzuron="" in/on="" rice="" grain="" and="" 0.8="" ppm="" in/on="" rice="" straw.="" f.="" magnitude="" of="" the="" residue="" in="" processed="" commodities="" uniroyal="" chemical="" company="" submitted="" data="" depicting="" the="" potential="" for="" concentration="" of="" diflubenzuron="" residues="" in="" the="" processed="" commodities="" of="" rice.="" two="" tests="" were="" conducted="" in="" mississippi="" (1)="" and="" texas="" (1).="" at="" each="" site,="" rice="" grain="" was="" harvested="" at="" maturity,="" 82-85="" days="" following="" a="" post-permanent="" flood="" application="" of="" the="" 2="" lb/gal="" flc="" formulation="" at="" 2="" lb.="" ai/a="" (8x="" the="" proposed="" maximum="" application="" rate).="" samples="" were="" processed="" according="" to="" simulated="" commercial="" procedures="" into="" hulls,="" bran,="" and="" polished="" rice.="" residues="" of="" diflubenzuron="" were="" non-detectable="" (loq=""><0.01 ppm)="" and="" 0.26="" and="" 0.87="" ppm="" in="" four="" treated="" samples="" of="" the="" rac,="" and="" did="" not="" concentrate="" in="" processed="" commodities="" of="" rice.="" as="" the="" residues="" of="" diflubenzuron="" did="" not="" concentrate="" in="" the="" hull,="" bran="" or="" whole="" rice="" fractions="" of="" processed="" rice="" grain,="" a="" tolerance="" for="" residues="" in="" rice="" processed="" commodities="" is="" not="" required.="" g.="" magnitude="" of="" secondary="" residues="" in="" meat/milk/poultry/eggs="" rice="" grain,="" straw,="" hulls="" and="" bran="" may="" be="" fed="" to="" livestock="" and/or="" poultry.="" however,="" the="" incremental="" exposure="" of="" diflubenzuron="" residues="" to="" livestock="" and="" poultry="" is="" minimal="" when="" compared="" to="" the="" existing="" exposure.="" epa="" concludes="" that="" the="" current="" tolerances="" on="" meat,="" milk,="" poultry="" and="" eggs="" are="" adequate="" to="" cover="" the="" added="" residues="" resulting="" from="" the="" use="" on="" rice.="" h.="" magnitude="" of="" residues="" in="" water,="" fish,="" and="" irrigated="" crops="" as="" an="" adjunct="" to="" the="" magnitude="" of="" the="" residue="" study="" on="" rice,="" the="" petitioner="" also="" conducted="" residue="" studies="" to="" determine="" the="" magnitude="" of="" the="" residue="" of="" diflubenzuron="" in="" treated="" rice="" flood="" waters.="" residue="" levels="" were="" determined="" from="" samples="" taken="" from="" the="" treated="" and="" untreated="" plots="" of="" the="" diflubenzuron="" crop="" field="" trials.="" five="" trials="" were="" conducted="" in="" california="" (2),="" louisiana="" (1),="" and="" texas="" (2).="" following="" one="" broadcast="" application="" of="" diflubenzuron="" as="" a="" 25%="" wp="" formulation="" or="" 2="" lb./gal="" flc="" formulation="" at=""> 0.25 lb. ai/A 
    (1x the maximum proposed application rate), one control and duplicate 
    treated samples of water were collected from each plot at each test 
    site at intervals of 0, 1, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28 days following 
    insecticide application. For the sampling intervals 0, 1, 3, and 7 days 
    after application of diflubenzuron at 1x the maximum proposed 
    application rate (0.25 lb. ai/A), residues of diflubenzuron in treated 
    rice flood waters were 0.011 - 0.04 ppm, 0.0007-
    
    [[Page 19056]]
    
    0.027 ppm, <0.0003 -="" 0.020="" ppm,="" and=""><0.0003 -="" 0.0014="" ppm;="" residues="" were="">LOQ may be present in rice 
    flood waters <14 days="" after="" application="" of="" diflubenzuron.="" i.="" international="" residue="" limits="" there="" are="" no="" codex="" proposals,="" canadian,="" or="" mexican="" limits="" for="" residues="" of="" diflubenzuron="" on="" rice.="" a="" compatibility="" issue="" is="" not="" relevant="" to="" the="" tolerance.="" j.="" rotational="" crop="" restrictions="" the="" nature="" of="" the="" residue="" in="" rotational="" crops="" is="" adequately="" understood="" for="" purposes="" of="" reregistration="" (residue="" chemistry="" chapters="" for="" the="" reregistration="" eligibility="" decision="" (red)="" document,="" march="" 16,="" 1995).="" although="" epa="" concluded="" that="" the="" available="" confined="" rotational="" crop="" study="" was="" inadequate="" to="" fully="" satisfy="" gln="" 165-1="" reregistration="" requirements,="" another="" confined="" rotational="" crop="" study="" will="" not="" be="" required="" because="" the="" study="" allowed="" epa="" to="" make="" regulatory="" conclusions="" regarding="" the="" need="" for="" limited="" rotational="" crop="" studies="" (gln="" 165-2)="" and="" to="" comment="" on="" the="" appropriateness="" of="" the="" currently="" established="" plantback="" interval="" on="" diflubenzuron="" end-use="" product="" labels.="" uniroyal="" has="" submitted="" data="" depicting="" diflubenzuron="" residues="" in="" representative="" rotational="" crops="" from="" two="" limited="" field="" trials.="" provided="" the="" petitioner="" explains="" the="" discrepancy="" in="" the="" 0.10="" ppm="" residue="" value="" reported="" for="" diflubenzuron="" in="" one="" of="" the="" wheat="" forage="" samples="" from="" ca,="" the="" limited="" field="" rotational="" crop="" study="" is="" adequate.="" the="" available="" data="" indicate="" that="" tolerances="" for="" diflubenzuron="" residues="" in="" rotational="" crops="" will="" not="" be="" required="" provided="" the="" diflubenzuron="" labels="" specify="" a="" restriction="" for="" the="" planting="" of="" rotation="" crops="" of="" at="" least="" 30="" days.="" iv.="" conclusion="" therefore,="" tolerances="" are="" established="" for="" residues="" of="" the="" insecticide="" diflubenzuron="" (n-[[4-chlorophenyl)amino]-carbonyl]-2,6-="" difluorobenzamide)="" and="" its="" metabolites,="" 4-chlorophenylurea="" (cpu)="" and="" 4-="" chloroaniline="" (pca)="" on="" rice="" grain="" at="" 0.02="" ppm="" and="" rice="" straw="" at="" 0.8="" ppm.="" v.="" objections="" and="" hearing="" requests="" the="" new="" ffdca="" section="" 408(g)="" provides="" essentially="" the="" same="" process="" for="" persons="" to="" ``object''="" to="" a="" tolerance="" regulation="" issued="" by="" epa="" under="" new="" section="" 408(e)="" and="" (l)(6)="" as="" was="" provided="" in="" the="" old="" section="" 408="" and="" in="" section="" 409.="" however,="" the="" period="" for="" filing="" objections="" is="" 60="" days,="" rather="" than="" 30="" days.="" epa="" currently="" has="" procedural="" regulations="" which="" govern="" the="" submission="" of="" objections="" and="" hearing="" requests.="" these="" regulations="" will="" require="" some="" modification="" to="" reflect="" the="" new="" law.="" however,="" until="" those="" modifications="" can="" be="" made,="" epa="" will="" continue="" to="" use="" those="" procedural="" regulations="" with="" appropriate="" adjustments="" to="" reflect="" the="" new="" law.="" any="" person="" may,="" by="" june="" 18,="" 1999,="" file="" written="" objections="" to="" any="" aspect="" of="" this="" regulation="" and="" may="" also="" request="" a="" hearing="" on="" those="" objections.="" objections="" and="" hearing="" requests="" must="" be="" filed="" with="" the="" hearing="" clerk,="" at="" the="" address="" given="" under="" the="" ``addresses''="" section="" (40="" cfr="" 178.20).="" a="" copy="" of="" the="" objections="" and/or="" hearing="" requests="" filed="" with="" the="" hearing="" clerk="" should="" be="" submitted="" to="" the="" opp="" docket="" for="" this="" rulemaking.="" the="" objections="" submitted="" must="" specify="" the="" provisions="" of="" the="" regulation="" deemed="" objectionable="" and="" the="" grounds="" for="" the="" objections="" (40="" cfr="" 178.25).="" each="" objection="" must="" be="" accompanied="" by="" the="" fee="" prescribed="" by="" 40="" cfr="" 180.33(i).="" if="" a="" hearing="" is="" requested,="" the="" objections="" must="" include="" a="" statement="" of="" the="" factual="" issues="" on="" which="" a="" hearing="" is="" requested,="" the="" requestor's="" contentions="" on="" such="" issues,="" and="" a="" summary="" of="" any="" evidence="" relied="" upon="" by="" the="" requestor="" (40="" cfr="" 178.27).="" a="" request="" for="" a="" hearing="" will="" be="" granted="" if="" the="" administrator="" determines="" that="" the="" material="" submitted="" shows="" the="" following:="" there="" is="" genuine="" and="" substantial="" issue="" of="" fact;="" there="" is="" a="" reasonable="" possibility="" that="" available="" evidence="" identified="" by="" the="" requestor="" would,="" if="" established,="" resolve="" one="" or="" more="" of="" such="" issues="" in="" favor="" of="" the="" requestor,="" taking="" into="" account="" uncontested="" claims="" or="" facts="" to="" the="" contrary;="" and="" resolution="" of="" the="" factual="" issues="" in="" the="" manner="" sought="" by="" the="" requestor="" would="" be="" adequate="" to="" justify="" the="" action="" requested="" (40="" cfr="" 178.32).="" information="" submitted="" in="" connection="" with="" an="" objection="" or="" hearing="" request="" may="" be="" claimed="" confidential="" by="" marking="" any="" part="" or="" all="" of="" that="" information="" as="" cbi.="" information="" so="" marked="" will="" not="" be="" disclosed="" except="" in="" accordance="" with="" procedures="" set="" forth="" in="" 40="" cfr="" part="" 2.="" a="" copy="" of="" the="" information="" that="" does="" not="" contain="" cbi="" must="" be="" submitted="" for="" inclusion="" in="" the="" public="" record.="" information="" not="" marked="" confidential="" may="" be="" disclosed="" publicly="" by="" epa="" without="" prior="" notice.="" vi.="" public="" docket="" epa="" has="" established="" a="" record="" for="" this="" rulemaking="" under="" docket="" control="" number="" [opp-300844]="" (including="" any="" comments="" and="" data="" submitted="" electronically).="" a="" public="" version="" of="" this="" record,="" including="" printed,="" paper="" versions="" of="" electronic="" comments,="" which="" does="" not="" include="" any="" information="" claimed="" as="" cbi,="" is="" available="" for="" inspection="" from="" 8:30="" a.m.="" to="" 4="" p.m.,="" monday="" through="" friday,="" excluding="" legal="" holidays.="" the="" public="" record="" is="" located="" in="" rm.="" 119="" of="" the="" public="" information="" and="" records="" integrity="" branch,="" information="" resources="" and="" services="" division="" (7502c),="" office="" of="" pesticide="" programs,="" environmental="" protection="" agency,="" crystal="" mall="" #2,="" 1921="" jefferson="" davis="" highway,="" arlington,="" va.="" electronic="" comments="" may="" be="" sent="" directly="" to="" epa="" at:="">opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov
        Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the 
    use of special characters and any form of encryption.
        The official record for this rulemaking, as well as the public 
    version, as described above will be kept in paper form. Accordingly, 
    EPA will transfer any copies of objections and hearing requests 
    received electronically into printed, paper form as they are received 
    and will place the paper copies in the official rulemaking record which 
    will also include all comments submitted directly in writing. The 
    official rulemaking record is the paper record maintained at the 
    Virginia address in ``ADDRESSES'' at the beginning of this document.
    
    VII. Regulatory Assessment Requirements
    
        This final rule establishes a tolerance for the residues of 
    diflubenzuron (N-[[4-chlorophenyl)amino]-carbonyl]-2,6-
    difluorobenzamide) and metabolites convertible to p-chloroaniline 
    expressed as diflubenzuron on rice grain at 0.02 ppm and rice straw at 
    0.8 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). 
    This final rule does not contain any information collections subject to 
    OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
    seq., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as 
    described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
    (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4). Nor does it require any
    
    [[Page 19057]]
    
    prior consultation as specified by Executive Order 12875, entitled 
    Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership (58 FR 58093, October 28, 
    1993), or special considerations as required by Executive Order 12898, 
    entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority 
    Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994), 
    or require OMB review in accordance with Executive Order 13045, 
    entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and 
    Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).
        In addition, since tolerances and exemptions that are established 
    on the basis of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the 
    tolerances for the residues of diflubenzuron (N-[[4-
    chlorophenyl)amino]-carbonyl]-2,6-difluorobenzamide) and metabolites 
    convertible to p-chloroaniline expressed as diflubenzuron on rice grain 
    at 0.02 ppm and rice straw at 0.8 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. 
    Nevertheless, the Agency has previously assessed whether establishing 
    tolerances, exemptions from tolerances, raising tolerance levels or 
    expanding exemptions might adversely impact small entities and 
    concluded, as a generic matter, that there is no adverse economic 
    impact. The factual basis for the Agency's generic certification for 
    tolerance actions published on May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950) and was 
    provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
    Administration.
    
    B. Executive Order 12875
    
        Under Executive Order 12875, entitled Enhancing the 
    Intergovernmental Partnership (58 FR 58093, October 28, 1993), EPA may 
    not issue a regulation that is not required by statute and that creates 
    a mandate upon a State, local or tribal government, unless the Federal 
    government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
    costs incurred by those governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA 
    must provide to OMB a description of the extent of EPA's prior 
    consultation with representatives of affected State, local, and tribal 
    governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written 
    communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the 
    need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 
    requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected 
    officials and other representatives of State, local, and tribal 
    governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development 
    of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
        Today's rule does not create an unfunded Federal mandate on State, 
    local, or tribal governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable 
    duties on these entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) 
    of Executive Order 12875 do not apply to this rule.
    
    C. Executive Order 13084
    
        Under Executive Order 13084, entitled Consultation and Coordination 
    with Indian Tribal Governments (63 FR 27655, May 19, 1998), EPA may not 
    issue a regulation that is not required by statute, that significantly 
    or uniquely affects the communities of Indian tribal governments, and 
    that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, 
    unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the 
    direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the 
    mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide OMB, in a separately identified 
    section of the preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of 
    EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected tribal 
    governments, a summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement 
    supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive 
    Order 13084 requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting 
    elected officials and other representatives of Indian tribal 
    governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development 
    of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect 
    their communities.''
        Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
    communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve 
    or impose any requirements that affect Indian tribes. Accordingly, the 
    requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to 
    this rule.
    
    VIII. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
    
        The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
    provides that before a rule may take effect, the Agency promulgating 
    the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
    to each House of the Congress and the Comptroller General of the United 
    States. 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 rule 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: April 7, 1999.
    James Jones,
    Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
        Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
    
    PART 180--[AMENDED]
    
        1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
    
        2. In Sec. 180.377, by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    Sec. 180.377   Diflubenzuron; tolerances for residues.
    
        (a)  *  *  *
        (2) Tolerances are established for residues of the insecticide 
    diflubenzuron (N-[[4-chlorophenyl)amino]-carbonyl]-2,6-
    difluorobenzamide) and its metabolites 4-chlorophenylurea and 4-
    chloroaniline on rice grain at 0.02 ppm and rice straw at 0.8 ppm.
    *    *    *    *    *
    
    [FR Doc. 99-9711 Filed 4-16-99; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
4/19/1999
Published:
04/19/1999
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
99-9711
Dates:
This regulation is effective April 19, 1999. Objections and requests for hearings must be received by EPA on or before June 18, 1999.
Pages:
19050-19057 (8 pages)
Docket Numbers:
OPP-300844, FRL-6075-4
RINs:
2070-AB78
PDF File:
99-9711.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 180.377