[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 10, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24785-24788]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11495]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[PP 1F2507/R2135; FRL-4954-2]
RIN 2070-AB78
Diflubenzuron; Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule establishes tolerances for residues of the
insecticide diflubenzuron in or on the raw agricultural commodities
orange, grapefruit, and tangerine. Thompson-Hayward Chemical Co.
requested pursuant to the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
this regulation to establish maximum permissible levels for residues of
diflubenzuron in or on the commodities.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 10, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Written objections, identified by the document control
number, [PP 1F2507/R2135], may be submitted to: Hearing Clerk (1900),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St., SW., Washington,
DC 20460. Fees accompanying objections 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 should be identified by the document control number and
submitted to: Public Response and Program Resources Branch, Field
Operations Division (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 St., SW., Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921
Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202.
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 in 5.1
file format or ASCII file format. All copies of objections and hearing
requests in electronic form must be identified by the docket number [PP
1F2507/R2135]. 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. Additional information on electronic submissions can be
found below in this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail: Dennis H. Edwards, Jr.,
Registration Division (7505C), Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. Office location and telephone number:
Rm. 207, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-305-
6386; e-mail: edwards.dennis@epamail.epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA issued a public notice, published in the
Federal Register of June 22, 1981 (46 FR 32313), which announced that
Thompson-Hayward Chemical Co., P.O. Box 2383, Kansas City, KS 66110,
had submitted petitions to EPA proposing tolerances under section 408
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a,
for residues of the insecticide diflubenzuron (N-[[(4-
chlorophenyl)amino] carbonyl]-2,6-difluorobenzamide) in or on the raw
agricultural commodities orange, grapefruit, and tangerine at 0.50 part
per million (ppm) and meat, milk, and eggs [[Page 24786]] at 0.05 ppm.
Thompson-Hayward Chemical Co. (P.O. Box 2383, Kansas City, KS 66110)
assigned all data rights and obligations connected to diflubenzuron
(DFB) to Duphar B. V. of Amsterdam, Holland. Since then, Duphar B.V.
has merged with Solvay and is now known as Solvay Duphar.
The petitions were subsequently amended, withdrawing the proposed
tolerances for animal tissue, milk, and eggs since they were already
established. The petitions were amended a second time to include citrus
molasses at 0.05 ppm and processed citrus products at 0.05 ppm. (50 FR
32313, August 14, 1985). It was determined that separate tolerances
were not needed for processed citrus products since residues in these
products were lower than in the raw agricultural product. However, the
petition was amended to propose establishment of tolerances for
diflubenzuron in citrus oil at 75 ppm and in dried citrus pulp at 1 ppm
(52 FR 2969, Jan. 29, 1987).
Notice of the tolerances currently requested by the petitions were
republished on October 1, 1993 (58 FR 54357). There were no comments
received in response to any of the notices of filing.
The data submitted in the petition and other relevant material have
been evaluated. The toxicity data considered in support of the
tolerances include an acute oral toxicity study in rats with a median
lethal dose (LD50) greater than 5,000 milligrams/kilogram body
weight (mg/kg), a 13-week subchronic feeding study in rats with a no-
observed-effect-level (NOEL) of about 2 mg/kg/day (calculated by
regression analysis), a 13-week subchronic feeding study in dogs with a
NOEL of 40 ppm in the feed (1.6 mg/kg/day), a 2-year chronic feeding
study in rats with a NOEL of 40 ppm in the feed (1.4 mg/kg/day), and a
1-year chronic oral (gavage) study in dogs with a NOEL of 2.0 mg/kg/
day. In all the subchronic and chronic studies listed above,
methemoglobinemia and/or sulfhemoglobinemia were observed at the next
higher dose level.
In a 2-year carcinogenicity study in rats at dose levels up to
10,000 ppm in the feed (500 mg/kg/day) and in a 91-week carcinogenicity
study in mice at dose levels up to 10,000 ppm in the feed (1,500 mg/kg/
day), increased incidences of tumors were not observed.
In developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits, the NOEL for
maternal toxicity and for developmental toxicity were greater than
1,000 mg/kg/day, the highest dose tested (HDT). In a two-generation
reproduction study in rats, the NOEL for reproductive performance in
adult rats was 50,000 ppm in the feed (2,500 mg/kg/day). Pup weights at
this dose level were slightly reduced from birth to 21 days in F1
offspring.
A battery of genotoxicity studies using diflubenzuron as the test
material were negative. These studies included a Salmonella/mammalian
microsome plate incorporation assay with and without metabolic
activation, an in vitro chromosome damage assay using cultures of
Chinese hamster ovary cells with and without metabolic activation, and
an unscheduled DNA synthesis assay using cultures of primary rat
hepatocytes. A metabolism study, using radiolabeled diflubenzuron, is
also available.
The reference dose (RfD) for diflbenzuron is 0.02 mg/kg/day and is
based on the NOEL of 2.0 mg/kg/day in the 1-year chronic oral study in
dogs. An uncertainty factor (UF) of 100 was used to calculate the RfD.
Granting the tolerance on orange, grapefruit, and tangerine will
increase the theoretical maximum residue contribution (TMRC) for
diflubenzuron from 0.000719 mg/kg/day to 0.001900 mg/kg/day. The
percentage of the RfD used is increased from 4.0 percent to
approximately 10 percent. The highest DRES Population Sub-Group ``Non-
Nursing Infants'' shows an increase from 0.003538 mg/kg/day to 0.006053
mg/kg/day, approximately 31 percent of the RfD.
Para-chloroaniline (PCA) and 4-clorophenylurea (CPU) are
metabolites of diflubenzuron that have been observed in studies in
lactating goats, lactating cows, pigs, poultry, rats, and mushrooms. A
citrus metabolism study at the proposed label rate, however, has shown
that PCA and CPU were not detected in whole citrus fruit or in citrus
oil at levels above 1 ppb and 2 ppb, respectively. Further, PCA and CPU
have not been detected in soybean or cotton seed. This suggests that
diflubenzuron applied to citrus plants, soybeans, or cotton is not
metabolized to PCA or CPU.
PCA has been tested for carcinogenicity by the National Toxicology
Program (NTP) study [Technical Report Series No. 351, NIH Publication
No. 89-2806, July 1989]. This test included two year oral studies in
F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice. PCA was administered by gavage to rats at
0,2,6, or 18 mg/kg/day and to mice at doses of 0,3,10, or 30 mg/kg/day.
A treatment-related increased incidence of uncommon sarcomas
(fibrosarcomas, hemangiosarcomas and osteosarcomas) of the spleen was
observed in the male rats, and an increased incidence of combined
hepatocellular adenomas/carcinomas was observed in male mice in these
studies. The increase in combined tumors in male mice was primarily due
to a dose-related increase in hepatocellular carcinomas.
Although diflubenzuron per se is negative in cancer bioassays, a
quantitative cancer risk assessment was performed in connection with
this tolerance because of the finding of small amounts of PCA and CPU
in animals administered large amounts of DFB. Possible human exposure
to PCA and CPU may result from ingestion of PCA and CPU formed in
animals consuming feeds containing diflubenzuron residues and also from
metabolic conversion of diflubenzuron to PCA and CPU in the human body.
In doing this risk assessment, it was assumed that CPU has the same
carcinogenic potential and potency as PCA. Although there is strong
evidence supporting the carcinogenicity of PCA in rats and mice, the
assumption that CPU also may be carcinogenic is not based on direct
testing in animals, but rather on a comparison of the chemical
structures of CPU and PCA.
None of the test data examined by the Agency indicated PCA and/or
related metabolites posed a significant carcinogenic risk to humans.
EPA estimated a carcinogenic risk of 2.7 X 10-7 from PCA and
related metabolites in animal products, and 1.0 X 10-7 from PCA
and related products converted in the human body from diflubenzuron and
9.4 X 10-7 from PCA and related metabolites in mushrooms for a
total cancer risk estimate for PCA and related metabolites of 1.3 X
10-6. This estimate was increased significantly by EPA's
assumption that CPU is a carcinogen. EPA concludes that any potential
human cancer risk from this use on citrus and other established uses of
diflubenzuron is negligible.
Solvay Duphar also petitioned for tolerances under FFDCA section
409 for diflubenzuron on citrus pulp and citrus oil. Tolerances are
needed to prevent processed foods from being deemed adulterated when
the processed food when ready to eat contains a pesticide residue at a
level greater than permitted by the corresponding section 408
tolerance. 21 U.S.C. 342(a)(2). EPA has determined, however, that the
citrus pulp and oil tolerances are not necessary. In 1981 and 1986, EPA
had concluded that a citrus pulp tolerance was needed due to one
processing study that showed levels of diflubenzuron in citrus pulp 1.9
times the level in oranges (i.e., a concentration factor of 1.9X).
Other processing studies showed that processing citrus to pulp resulted
in a reduction of diflubenzuron residues or a lower concentration
factor than 1.9X. [[Page 24787]] Recently, EPA has begun averaging
results from processing studies in determining concentration factors
and, hence, whether section 409 tolerances are needed. When the results
from all processing studies for citrus pulp are averaged, the
concentration factor is lowered to 1.1X. Given the variability in
analytical methods and this low concentration factor, EPA believes that
it is unlikely that any citrus pulp derived from citrus containing
legal levels of diflubenzuron could be reliably determined to have
levels of diflubenzuron above the citrus tolerance. Because it is
unlikely that citrus pulp will have levels of diflubenzuron above the
section 408 tolerance, no section 409 tolerance is needed.
EPA has determined that no section 409 tolerance is necessary for
citrus oil because citrus oil is not a ``ready to eat'' processed food
and ``ready to eat'' foods containing citrus oil are unlikely to have
diflubenzuron residues greater than the citrus tolerance. As noted
above, under FFDCA section 402(a)(2), processed foods containing
pesticide residues are not deemed adulterated if the level of pesticide
residues in the processed food ``when ready to eat is not greater than
the tolerance prescribed for the raw agricultural commodity.''
Traditionally, EPA has treated all processed food as ``ready to eat.''
In a petition filed by the National Food Processors Association and
others, it has been argued that EPA's past practice is not consistent
with the statute. Although EPA will address this issue more fully in
its formal response to that petition, EPA agrees that its approach to
the term ``ready to eat'' has not always been in accord with the plain
meaning of that term. EPA believes that the common sense meaning of the
term ``ready to eat'' food is food ready for consumption without
further preparation. Citrus oil is not consumed ``as is'' but is used
as a flavoring in other foods. As such, citrus oil is not ``ready to
eat.'' Further, the use of citrus oil in the preparation of ``ready to
eat'' foods involves such a significant dilution of the citrus oil that
EPA believes that it is unlikely that these foods would contain levels
of diflubenzuron greater than the citrus tolerance. Thus, no section
409 tolerance is needed for citrus oil.
The established tolerance of 0.05 ppm for residues of diflubenzuron
on/in eggs, milk, fat, meat, and meat byproducts of goats, hogs,
horses, sheep, and poultry is adequate to cover secondary residues
resulting from the proposed use as delineated in 40 CFR 180.6(a)(2).
The metabolism of diflubenzuron for this use on orange, grapefruit,
and tangerine is adequately understood. The residue of concern is
diflubenzuron per se. An adequate analytical method, gas chromatography
with electron capture detector, is available for enforcement purposes
in the Pesticide Analytical Manual, Vol. II.
The pesticide is considered useful for the purpose for which the
tolerances are sought. Based on the information and data considered,
the Agency concludes that the establishment of the tolerances for
orange, grapefruit, and tangerine will protect the public health.
Therefore, the tolerances are established as set forth below.
Any person adversely affected by this regulation may, within 30
days after publication of this document in the Federal Register, file
written objections with the Hearing Clerk, at the address given above.
40 CFR 178.20. 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 issue(s) on which a hearing is
requested, the requestor's contentions on each such issue, and a
summary of any evidence relied upon by the objector. 40 CFR 178.27. A
request for a hearing will be granted if the Administrator determines
that the material submitted show the following: There is a 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 issue(s) in the manner sought by the
requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested. 40 CFR
178.32.
A record has been established for this rulemaking under docket
number [PP 1F2507/R2135] (including objections and hearing requests
submitted electronically as described below). 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 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The public record is located in Room 1132 of the Public
Response and Program Resources Branch, Field Operations Division
(7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA.
Written objections and hearing requests, identified by the document
control number [PP 1F2507/R2135], may be submitted to the Hearing Clerk
(1900), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 3708, 401 M St., SW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
A copy of electronic objections and hearing requests filed with the
Hearing Clerk can be sent directly to EPA at:
opp-Docket@epamail.epa.gov
A copy of electronic objections and hearing requests filed with the
Hearing Clerk 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 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 objections and hearing requests submitted directly in
writing. The official rulemaking record is the paper record maintained
at the address in ADDRESSES at the beginning of this document.
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), the Agency
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and
therefore subject to all the requirements of the Executive Order (i.e.,
Regulatory Impact Analysis, review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB)). Under section 3(f), the order defines ``significant'' as
those actions likely to lead to a rule (1) having an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely and materially
affecting a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal
governments or communities (also known as ``economically
significant''); (2) creating serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfering with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3)
materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlement, grants, user
fees, or loan programs; or (4) raising novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the
principles set forth in this Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of the Executive Order, EPA has determined
that this rule is not ``significant'' and is therefore not subject to
OMB review.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(Pub. L. 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5U.S.C. 601-612), the Administrator has
determined that regulations establishing new tolerances
[[Page 24788]] or raising tolerance levels or establishing exemptions
from tolerance requirements do not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. A certification statement to
this effect was published in the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46 FR
24950).
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from the
requirements of Section 3 of Executive Order 12866.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(Pub. L. 96-534, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Administrator
has determined that regulations establishing new tolerances, or raising
tolerance levels, or establishing exemptions from tolerance
requirements do not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. A certification statement to this effect was
published in the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950). (Sec.
408(d)(2), 68 Stat. 512 (21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(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: May 5, 1995.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.377 is amended in paragraph (a) in the table therein
by adding and alphabetically inserting entries for the commodities
orange, grapefruit, and tangerine, to read as follows:
Sec. 180.377 Diflubenzuron; tolerances for residues.
(a) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Grapefruit................................................. 0.5
* * * * *
Orange..................................................... 0.5
* * * * *
Tangerine.................................................. 0.5
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
[FR Doc. 95-11495 Filed 5-5-95; 2:12 pm]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
