99-16933. N-Acyl sarcosines and Sodium N-acyl sarcosinates; Tolerance Exemption  

  • [Federal Register Volume 64, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 7, 1999)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 36640-36642]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 99-16933]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 180
    
    [OPP-300885; FRL-6088-4]
    RIN 2070-AB18
    
    
    N-Acyl sarcosines and Sodium N-acyl sarcosinates; Tolerance 
    Exemption
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Proposed rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: EPA proposes to establish an exemption from the requirement of 
    a tolerance for residues of N-acyl sarcosines [N-oleoyl sarcosine (CAS 
    Reg. No. 110-25-8); N-stearoyl sarcosine (CAS Reg. No. 142-48-3); N-
    lauroyl sarcosine (CAS Reg. No. 97-78-9); N-myristoyl sarcosine (CAS 
    Reg. No. 52558-73-3); N-cocoyl sarcosine mixture (CAS Reg. No. 68411-
    97-2); and sodium N-acyl sarcosinates [N-methyl-N-(1-oxo-9-octodecenyl) 
    glycine (CAS Reg. No. 3624-77-9); N-methyl-N-(1-oxooctadecyl) glycine 
    (CAS Reg. No. 5136-55-0); N-methyl-N-(1-oxododecyl) glycine (CAS Reg. 
    No. 137-16-6); N-methyl-N-(1-oxotetradecyl glycine (CAS Reg. No. 30364-
    51-3); and N-cocoyl sarcosine sodium salt mixture (CAS Reg. No. 61791-
    59-1)] when used as inert ingredients (surfactants) in pesticide 
    formulations containing glyphosate. EPA is proposing this regulation on 
    its own initiative.
    
    DATES: Written comments should be submitted to EPA on or before 
    September 7, 1999.
    ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written comments 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, deliver comments to: 
    Rm. 119, Crystal Mall 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA.
        Comments and data may also be submitted electronically to: docket@epa.gov. Follow the instructions under Unit V. of this document. 
    No Confidential Business Information (CBI) should be submitted through 
    e-mail.
        Information submitted as a comment concerning this document 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 comment that 
    does not contain CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public 
    record. Information not marked confidential will be included in the 
    public docket by EPA without prior notice. The public docket is 
    available for public inspection in Rm. 119 at the Virginia address 
    given in this unit, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
    excluding legal holidays.
    
     FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amelia M. Acierto, 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) 308-8377, 
    acierto.amelia@epa.gov.
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Prior to the enactment of the Food Quality 
    Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA), EPA proposed that exemptions from the 
    requirement of a tolerance be established for residues of N-acyl 
    sarcosines [N-oleoyl sarcosine, N-stearoyl sarcosine, N-lauroyl 
    sarcosine, N-myristoyl sarcosine, N-cocoyl sarcosine mixture] and 
    sodium N-acyl sarcosinates [N-methyl-N-(1-oxo-9-octodecenyl) glycine; 
    N-methyl-N-(1-oxooctadecyl) glycine; N-methyl-N-(1-oxododecyl)glycine; 
    N-methyl-N-(1-oxotetracdecyl)glycine; and N-cocoyl sodium salt 
    mixture], in response to a pesticide petition (PP 4E4417) submitted by 
    Hampshire Chemical Company, 55 Hayden Avenue, Lexington, MA 02173 
    pursuant to section 408(e) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 
    (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(e). EPA published the proposed rule in the 
    Federal Register of July 24, 1996 (61 FR 38423). There were no comments 
    received in response to the proposed rule.
        This document represents an EPA-initiated proposal to establish 
    tolerance exemptions for the above noted substances to include the 
    Agency's determination of safety for the tolerance exemptions in view 
    of the FQPA amendments to section 408 of FFDCA. EPA is proposing this 
    regulation on its own initiative pursuant to section 408(e)(1)(B) of 
    FFDCA.
    
    I. Risk Assessment and Statutory Authority
    
        New section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an 
    exemption from the requirement of a tolerance (the legal limit for a 
    pesticide chemical residue in or on a food commodity) only if EPA 
    determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(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.'' These include 
    exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, but does 
    not include occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(B) requires EPA to 
    give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the 
    pesticide chemical residue in establishing an exemption 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.''
    
    II. Risk Assessment and Statutory Findings
    
        N-acyl sarcosines and sodium N-acyl sarcosinates form a large class 
    of chemical compounds where the acyl group is derived from fatty acids 
    such as lauric, oleic and stearic acid and/or derived from the combined 
    fatty acids of coconut oil. N-acyl sarcosine and sodium N-acyl 
    sarcosinates are metabolized by humans to sarcosine and the 
    corresponding fatty acids. Sarcosine is ubiquitous in biological 
    materials and is present in such foods as egg yolks, turkey, ham, 
    vegetables, legumes, etc.
        Sarcosine is reported to be formed from dietary intake of choline 
    and from the metabolism of methionine and is rapidly degraded to 
    glycine, which, in addition to its importance as a constituent of 
    protein, plays a
    
    [[Page 36641]]
    
    significant role in various physiological processes as a prime 
    metabolic source of components of living cells such as glutathione, 
    creatine, purines and serine. The concentration of sarcosine in blood 
    serum of normal human subjects is reported to be 1.59 + 1.08 micromoles 
    per liter.
        Based upon the proposed use as an inert ingredient in glyphosate 
    formulations, dietary (food) exposure to N-acyl sarcosines and/or 
    sodium N-acyl sarcosinates would not be expected to exceed the 
    theoretical maximum residue concentration (TMRC) of glyphosate to the 
    U.S. population of 0.03 mg/kg/day. Dietary exposure to N-acyl 
    sarcosines and/or sodium N-acyl sarcosinates at or below these levels 
    would not result in any increases in the normal sarcosine blood serum 
    concentrations found in humans.
        Taking into account the proposed use in glyphosate formulations, 
    the Agency has concluded with reasonable certainty that residues of N-
    acyl sacosines and/or the sodium N-acyl sarcosinates in drinking water 
    would be negligible, and that no harm will result from aggregate 
    exposure to N-acyl sacosines and/or the sodium N-acyl sarcosinates.
    
    III. 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.''
        EPA does not have, at this time, available data to determine 
    whether N-acyl sarcosines and sodium N-acyl sarcosinates have 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, N-acyl sarcosines and sodium N-acyl sarcosinates 
    do not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other 
    substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA 
    has not assumed that N-acyl sarcosines and sodium N-acyl sarcosinates 
    have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances.
    
    A. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety
    
        Based upon the ubiquitous presence of sarcosine in human tissue and 
    the fact that N-acyl sarcosines are readily metabolized to the N-acyl 
    sarcosines and their salts, the Agency believes that exposure to this 
    chemical will not pose a dietary risk under any forseable circumstances 
    to the U.S. population, including infants and children. The Agency has 
    arrived at this conclusion because of the inconsequential increases in 
    dietary exposure resulting from its use as an inert ingredient in 
    glyphosate formulations. EPA concludes that there is a reasonable 
    certainty of no harm from the establishment of this tolerance 
    exemption.
        FFDCA section 408 provides that EPA shall apply an additional 
    tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the case of 
    threshold effects in calculating a dose level that accounts for pre-and 
    post-natal toxicity and the completeness of the database 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 the use of margin of exposure 
    analysis or through using uncertainty factors (safety) in calculating a 
    dose level that poses no appreciable risk to humans.
        Due to the ubiquitous nature of sarcosine in human tissue and food, 
    EPA has not used a safety factor analysis in assessing the risk of N-
    acyl sarcosines and sodium N-acyl sarcosinates. For the same reason, 
    application of the additional safety factor for infants and children 
    would not be appropriate.
    
    B. Other Considerations
    
        1. Endocrine disruptors. There are no reports of any estrogenic and 
    other adverse effects to human population as a result of the use of N-
    acyl sarcosines and/or sodium N-acyl sarcosinates.
        2. Analytical enforcement methodology. The Agency is establishing 
    an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance without any numerical 
    limitation; therefore, the Agency has concluded that an analytical 
    method is not required for enforcement purposes for N-acyl sarcosines 
    and sodium N-acyl sarcosinates.
    
    C. Existing Tolerances
    
        No existing tolerances or exemptions from the requirement of a 
    tolerance have been issued for N-acyl sarcosines and/or sodium N-acyl 
    sarcosinates as pesticide chemicals in the United States.
    
    D. International Residue Limits
    
        No CODEX maximum residue levels have been established for N-acyl 
    sarcosines and/or sodium N-acyl sarcosinates.
    
    E. Conclusion
    
        Therefore, based on the information and data considered, EPA is 
    proposing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance be 
    established for residues of N-acyl sarcosines and sodium N-acyl 
    sarcosinates when used as inert ingredients (surfactants) in pesticide 
    formulations containing glyphosate at a concentration not to exceed 10% 
    weight of the formulation.
    
    IV. Comments
    
        Under FFDCA section 408(e)(2), EPA must provide for a public 
    comment period before issuing a final tolerance or tolerance exemption 
    under section 408(e)(1). The public comment period is to be for 60 days 
    unless the Administrator for good cause finds that it is in the public 
    interest to reduce that comment period.
    
    V. Public Record and Electronic Submissions
    
        The official record for this rulemaking, as well as the public 
    version, has been established for this rulemaking under docket control 
    number [OPP-300885] (including comments and data submitted 
    electronically as described in this unit). 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 official rulemaking record is located at the 
    Virginia address in ADDRESSES at the beginning of this document.
        Electronic comments can be sent directly to EPA at:
        opp-docket@epa.gov
    
    
        Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the 
    use of special characters and any form of encryption. Comment and data 
    will also be accepted on disks in Wordperfect 5.1/6.1 or ASCII file 
    format. All comments and data in electronic form must be identified by 
    the docket control number [OPP-300885]. Electronic comments on this 
    proposed rule may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.
    
     VI. Regulatory Assessment Requirements
    
    A. Certain Acts and Executive Orders
    
        This action proposes an exemption from the tolerance requirement 
    under FFDCA section 408(e). 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).
    
    [[Page 36642]]
    
    In addition, this proposed 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) (Public Law 104-4). Nor 
    does it require any 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 special 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, under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 
    601 et seq.), the Agency 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 was 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 proposed rule does not create an unfunded Federal mandate 
    on State, local, or tribal governments. The proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed rule.
    
     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 22, 1999.
    James Jones,
    
    Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
        Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter I be amended as 
    follows:
    
    PART 180--[AMENDED]
    
        1. The authority citation for part 180 would continue to read as 
    follows:
    
         Authority: 15 U.S.C. 321(q), 346(a) and 371.
    
        2. By adding new Sec. 180.1207 to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 180.1207  N-acyl sarconsines and sodium N-acyl sarcosinates; 
    exemption from requirement of a tolerance.
    
        An exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is established for 
    residues of the following substances when used as inert ingredients 
    (surfactants) at levels not to exceed 10% in pesticide formulations 
    containing glyphosate:
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Name                             CAS Reg. No.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    N-acyl sarcosines.......................................
      N-oleoyl sarcosine....................................        110-25-8
      N-stearoyl sarcosine..................................        142-48-3
      N-lauroyl sarcosine...................................        97-78-9)
      N-myristoyl sarcosine.................................      52558-73-3
      N-cocoyl sarcosine mixture............................      68411-97-2
    Sodium N-acyl sarcosinates..............................
      N-methyl-N-(1-oxo-9-octodecenyl) glycine..............       3624-77-9
      N-methyl -N-(1-oxooctadecyl) glycine..................       5136-55-0
      N-methyl-N- (1-oxododecyl) glycine....................        137-16-6
      N-methyl-N-(1-oxotetradecyl glycine...................      30364-51-3
      N-cocoyl sarcosine sodium salt mixture................      61791-59-1
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    [FR Doc. 99-16933 Filed 7-6-99; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
07/07/1999
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Proposed rule.
Document Number:
99-16933
Dates:
Written comments should be submitted to EPA on or before September 7, 1999.
Pages:
36640-36642 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
OPP-300885, FRL-6088-4
RINs:
2070-AB18
PDF File:
99-16933.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 180.1207