97-25891. Carfentrazone-ethyl; Temporary Pesticide Tolerance  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 189 (Tuesday, September 30, 1997)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 51032-51038]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-25891]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 180
    
    [OPP-300554; FRL-5744-8]
    
    RIN 2070-AB78
    
    
    Carfentrazone-ethyl; Temporary Pesticide Tolerance
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a temporary tolerance for combined 
    residues of the herbicide carfentrazone-ethyl (ethyl-alpha-2-dichloro-
    5-[4-(difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-
    yl]-4-fluorobenzenepropanoate) and its major wheat metabolites in or on 
    corn (fodder, forage, and grain) and wheat (grain, hay, and straw). FMC 
    requested this tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 
    (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 
    104-170).
    
    DATES: This regulation is effective September 30, 1997. Objections and 
    requests for hearings must be received by EPA on or before December 1, 
    1997.
    
    ADDRESSES: Written objections and hearing requests, identified by the 
    docket control number, OPP-300554, 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-300554], must also be submitted to: Public Information and 
    Records Integrity Branch, Information Resources and Services Division 
    (7506C), 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. 1132, 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-300554. 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: Joanne I. Miller, Product 
    Manager, 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) 305-6224, e-mail: 
    miller.joanne@epamail.epa.gov.
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of May 16, 1997 (62 
    FR 27040) (FRL-5717-4), 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) for tolerance by FMC 
    Corporation, 1735 Market St., Philadelphia, PA 19103. This notice 
    included a summary of the petition prepared by FMC Corporation, the 
    registrant. There were no comments received in response to the notice 
    of filing. The petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by 
    establishing a temporary tolerance for combined residues of the 
    herbicide carfentrazone-ethyl (ethyl-alpha-2-dichloro-5-[4-
    (difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl]-4-
    fluorobenzenepropanoate), and its metabolite in or on field corn 
    forage, fodder, and grain at 0.15 ppm; and for wheat hay, straw, and 
    grain at 0.20 ppm part per million (ppm). This tolerance will expire on 
    May 8, 1998. This tolerance request was submitted along with an 
    application for an experimiental use permit (EUP). The EUP proposed the 
    experimental use of carfentrazone-ethyl on corn and wheat. Under FIFRA, 
    section 5 for experimental use permits, a temporary tolerance level 
    must be established if a pesticide may reasonably be expected to result 
    in any residue in or on food or feed use.
    
    I. Risk Assessment and Statutory Findings
    
        New 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 exposure to the pesticide 
    chemical residue. . . .''
        EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from 
    aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. First, EPA determines the 
    toxicity of pesticides based primarily on toxicological studies using 
    laboratory animals. These studies address many adverse health effects, 
    including (but not limited to) reproductive effects, developmental 
    toxicity, toxicity to the nervous system, and carcinogenicity. Second, 
    EPA examines exposure to the pesticide through the diet (e.g., food and 
    drinking water) and through exposures that occur as a result of 
    pesticide use in residential settings.
    
    A. Toxicity
    
        1. Threshold and non-threshold effects. For many animal studies, a 
    dose response relationship can be determined, which provides a dose 
    that causes adverse effects (threshold effects) and doses causing no 
    observed effects (the ``no-observed effect level'' or ``NOEL'').
        Once a study has been evaluated and the observed effects have been 
    determined to be threshold effects, EPA generally divides the NOEL from 
    the study with the lowest NOEL by an uncertainty factor (usually 100 or 
    more) to determine the Reference Dose (RfD). The RfD is a level at or 
    below which daily aggregate exposure over a lifetime will not pose 
    appreciable risks to human health. An uncertainty factor (sometimes 
    called a ``safety factor'') of 100 is commonly used since it is assumed 
    that people may be up to 10 times more sensitive to pesticides than
    
    [[Page 51033]]
    
    the test animals, and that one person or subgroup of the population 
    (such as infants and children) could be up to 10 times more sensitive 
    to a pesticide than another. In addition, EPA assesses the potential 
    risks to infants and children based on the weight of the evidence of 
    the toxicology studies and determines whether an additional uncertainty 
    factor is warranted. Thus, an aggregate daily exposure to a pesticide 
    residue at or below the RfD (expressed as 100 percent or less of the 
    RfD) is generally considered acceptable by EPA. EPA generally uses the 
    RfD to evaluate the chronic risks posed by pesticide exposure. For 
    shorter term risks, EPA calculates a margin of exposure (MOE) by 
    dividing the estimated human exposure into the NOEL from the 
    appropriate animal study. Commonly, EPA finds MOEs lower than 100 to be 
    unacceptable. This 100-fold MOE is based on the same rationale as the 
    100-fold uncertainty factor.
        Lifetime feeding studies in two species of laboratory animals are 
    conducted to screen pesticides for cancer effects. When evidence of 
    increased cancer is noted in these studies, the Agency conducts a 
    weight of the evidence review of all relevant toxicological data 
    including short-term and mutagenicity studies and structure activity 
    relationship. Once a pesticide has been classified as a potential human 
    carcinogen, different types of risk assessments (e.g., linear low dose 
    extrapolations or MOE calculation based on the appropriate NOEL) will 
    be carried out based on the nature of the carcinogenic response and the 
    Agency's knowledge of its mode of action.
        2. Differences in toxic effect due to exposure duration. The 
    toxicological effects of a pesticide can vary with different exposure 
    durations. EPA considers the entire toxicity data base, and based on 
    the effects seen for different durations and routes of exposure, 
    determines which risk assessments should be done to assure that the 
    public is adequately protected from any pesticide exposure scenario. 
    Both short and long durations of exposure are always considered. 
    Typically, risk assessments include ``acute,'' ``short-term,'' 
    ``intermediate term,'' and ``chronic'' risks. These assessments are 
    defined by the Agency as follows.
        Acute risk, by the Agency's definition, results from 1-day 
    consumption of food and water, and reflects toxicity which could be 
    expressed following a single oral exposure to the pesticide residues. 
    High end exposure to food and water residues are typically assumed.
        Short-term risk results from exposure to the pesticide for a period 
    of 1-7 days, and therefore overlaps with the acute risk assessment. 
    Historically, this risk assessment was intended to address primarily 
    dermal and inhalation exposure which could result, for example, from 
    residential pesticide applications. However, since enaction of FQPA, 
    this assessment has been expanded to include both dietary and non-
    dietary sources of exposure, and will typically consider exposure from 
    food, water, and residential uses when reliable data are available. In 
    this assessment, risks from average food and water exposure, and high-
    end residential exposure, are aggregated. High-end exposures from all 
    three sources are not typically added because of the very low 
    probability of this occurring in most cases, and because the other 
    conservative assumptions built into the assessment assure adequate 
    protection of public health. However, for cases in which high-end 
    exposure can reasonably be expected from multiple sources (e.g. 
    frequent and widespread homeowner use in a specific geographical area), 
    multiple high-end risks will be aggregated and presented as part of the 
    comprehensive risk assessment/characterization. Since the toxicological 
    endpoint considered in this assessment reflects exposure over a period 
    of at least 7 days, an additional degree of conservatism is built into 
    the assessment; i.e., the risk assessment nominally covers 1-7 days 
    exposure, and the toxicological endpoint/NOEL is selected to be 
    adequate for at least 7 days of exposure. (Toxicity results at lower 
    levels when the dosing duration is increased.)
        Intermediate-term risk results from exposure for 7 days to several 
    months. This assessment is handled in a manner similar to the short-
    term risk assessment.
        Chronic risk assessment describes risk which could result from 
    several months to a lifetime of exposure. For this assessment, risks 
    are aggregated considering average exposure from all sources for 
    representative population subgroups including infants and children.
    
    B. Aggregate Exposure
    
        In examining aggregate exposure, FFDCA section 408 requires that 
    EPA take into account available and reliable information concerning 
    exposure from the pesticide residue in the food in question, residues 
    in other foods for which there are tolerances, residues in groundwater 
    or surface water that is consumed as drinking water, and other non-
    occupational exposures through pesticide use in gardens, lawns, or 
    buildings (residential and other indoor uses). Dietary exposure to 
    residues of a pesticide in a food commodity are estimated by 
    multiplying the average daily consumption of the food forms of that 
    commodity by the tolerance level or the anticipated pesticide residue 
    level. The Theoretical Maximum Residue Contribution (TMRC) is an 
    estimate of the level of residues consumed daily if each food item 
    contained pesticide residues equal to the tolerance. In evaluating food 
    exposures, EPA takes into account varying consumption patterns of major 
    identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children. 
    The TMRC is a ``worst case'' estimate since it is based on the 
    assumptions that food contains pesticide residues at the tolerance 
    level and that 100% of the crop is treated by pesticides that have 
    established tolerances. If the TMRC exceeds the RfD or poses a lifetime 
    cancer risk that is greater than approximately one in a million, EPA 
    attempts to derive a more accurate exposure estimate for the pesticide 
    by evaluating additional types of information (anticipated residue data 
    and/or percent of crop treated data) which show, generally, that 
    pesticide residues in most foods when they are eaten are well below 
    established tolerances.
        Percent of crop treated estimates are derived from federal and 
    private market survey data. Typically, a range of estimates are 
    supplied and the upper end of this range is assumed for the exposure 
    assessment. By using this upper end estimate of percent of crop 
    treated, the Agency is reasonably certain that exposure is not 
    understated for any significant subpopulation group. Further, regional 
    consumption information is taken into account through EPA's computer-
    based model for evaluating the exposure of significant subpopulations 
    including several regional groups, to pesticide residues. For this 
    pesticide, the most highly exposed population subgroup (non-nursing 
    infants <1 year="" old)="" was="" not="" regionally="" based.="" 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="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" and="" to="" make="" a="" determination="" on="" aggregate="" exposure,="" consistent="" with="" section="" 408(b)(2),="" for="" a="" temporary="" tolerance="" for="" combined="" residues="" of="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" (ethyl-alpha-2-dichloro-5-[4-="" [[page="" 51034]]="" (difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1h-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl]-4-="" fluorobenzenepropanoate)="" and="" its="" metabolites="" on="" wheat="" at="" 0.20="" ppm="" and="" corn="" at="" 0.15="" 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="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" are="" discussed="" below.="" 1.="" a="" battery="" of="" acute="" toxicity="" studies="" placed="" technical="" carfentrazone="" in="" toxicity="" categories="" iii="" and="" iv.="" no="" evidence="" of="" sensitization="" was="" observed="" following="" dermal="" application="" in="" guinea="" pigs.="" 2.="" a="" 90-day="" subchronic="" toxicity="" study="" was="" conducted="" in="" rats,="" with="" dietary="" intake="" levels="" of="" 58,="" 226,="" 4,700,="" 831="" and="" 1,197="" milligrams/="" kilograms/day="" (mg/kg/day)="" in="" males="" and="" 72,="" 284,="" 578,="" 1,008="" and="" 1,427="" mg/kg/day="" in="" females,="" respectively.="" a="" noel="" of="" 226="" mg/kg/day="" (males)="" and="" 5,778="" mg/kg/day="" (females)="" was="" established.="" loels="" of="" 470="" mg/kg/day="" (males)="" and="" 578="" mg/kg/day="" (females)="" was="" established="" based="" on="" decreases="" in="" body="" weights="" and/or="" gains,="" reductions="" in="" food="" consumption,="" alterations="" in="" clinical="" chemistry="" parameters,="" and="" histopathological="" lesions.="" 3.="" a="" reverse="" gene="" mutation="" assay="" (salmonella="" typhirmurium)="" yielded="" negative="" results,="" both="" with="" and="" without="" metabolic="" activation.="" 4.="" an="" in="" vitro="" mutation="" assay="" test="" yielded="" negative="" results,="" there="" was="" no="" indication="" of="" an="" increased="" incidence="" of="" gene="" mutation="" at="" the="" hgprt="" locus="" as="" a="" result="" of="" exposure.="" 5.="" an="" in="" vitro="" mammalian="" cytogenetic="" test="" yielded="" positive="" under="" nonactivated="" conditions="" in="" this="" assay.="" 6.="" an="" in="" vivo="" micronucleus="" cytogenetic="" assay="" study="" was="" conducted="" in="" mice="" by="" ip="" injection="" of="" 600,="" 1,200="" and="" 2,400="" mg/kg="" to="" groups="" of="" five="" males="" and="" five="" females.="" there="" was="" no="" indication="" of="" an="" increased="" incidence="" in="" micronucleated="" polychromatic="" erythrocytes="" associated="" with="" exposure="" to="" the="" test="" material.="" 7.="" a="" 13-week="" study="" was="" conducted="" on="" four="" pure="" breed="" beagle="" dogs/="" sex/group="" for="" 90="" days="" at="" dietary="" intake="" levels="" of="" 0,="" 50,="" 150,="" 500="" and="" 1,000="" mg/kg/day.="" noels="" of="" 500="" mg/kg/day="" for="" both="" sexes="" and="" the="" loel="" of="" 150="" mg/kg/day,="" based="" on="" systemic="" toxicity="" (decrease="" in="" the="" rate="" of="" weight="" gain="" in="" females="" and="" an="" increase="" in="" porphyrin="" levels="" in="" both="" sexes).="" 8.="" an="" oral="" prenatal="" developmental="" study="" was="" administered="" by="" gavage="" to="" pregnant="" female="" new="" zealand="" white="" rabbits="" (20/group)="" on="" days="" 7-19="" of="" gestation="" at="" dose="" levels="" of="" 0,="" 10,="" 40,="" 150,="" or="" 300="" mg/kg/day.="" there="" was="" no="" evidence="" of="" treatment-related="" prenatal="" developmental="" toxicity.="" the="" developmental="" loel="" was="" not="" determined.="" the="" developmental="" noel=""> of 300 mg/kg/day.
    
    B. Toxicological Endpoints
    
        1. Acute toxicity. The Agency does not have a concern for an acute 
    dietary assessment since the available data do not indicate any 
    evidence of significant toxicity from a 1 day or single event exposure 
    by the oral route, therefore an acute (food and water) risk assessment 
    was not required.
        2. Chronic toxicity. EPA has established the RfD for carfentrazone-
    ethyl at 0.06 mg/kg/day. This RfD is based on the NOEL of 60 mg/kg/day 
    from a 90-day rat study with a 1,000 fold uncertainty factor.
        3. Carcinogenicity. No concern for cancer risks were identified. 
    Data from available studies do not indicate a treatment-related tumor 
    problem, and cancer risk endpoints have not been identified.
    
    C. Exposures and Risks
    
        1. From food and feed uses. Tolerances have not yet been 
    established for the combined residues of carfentrazone-ethyl (ethyl-
    alpha-2-dichloro-5-[4-(difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-
    1,2,4-triazol-1-yl]-4-fluorobenzenepropanoate), and its metabolites, in 
    or on a variety of raw agricultural commodities. Due to the non-
    quantifiable carfentrazone-ethyl residues in/on the treated RAC's 
    (except wheat forage, however, there is a label feeding restriction) 
    fed to livestock and the limited number of acres involved, there is no 
    expectation of secondary residues in livestock commodities of meat, 
    meat-by-products, fat, milk, and eggs. Risk assessments were conducted 
    by EPA to assess dietary exposures and risks from carfentrazone-ethyl 
    as follows:
        i. Acute exposure and risk. Acute dietary risk assessments are 
    performed for a food-use pesticide if a toxicological study has 
    indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result 
    of a 1 day or single exposure. No short and intermediate endpoints for 
    occupational and residential exposure were identified.
        ii. Chronic exposure and risk. The chronic dietary analysis 
    indicates that exposure from the proposed temporary tolerances for use 
    of carfentrazone-ethyl in/on corn and wheat for the U.S. population 
    would account for less than 1% of the RfD. For children (1-6 years), 
    the subgroup with the highest exposure, 1% of the RfD would be 
    utilized. This chronic analysis for carfentrazone is an upper-bound 
    estimate of dietary exposure with all residues at tolerance level and 
    assuming 100% of the commodities to be treated. Since only 4,000 acres 
    of wheat and 4,000 acres of corn will be treated under the EUP program 
    (which represents less than 1% of the total wheat and corn harvested in 
    the United States, this dietary analysis represents an over estimate of 
    the percent RfD that will be utilized by the proposed temporary 
    tolerances. Therefore, the chronic dietary risk resulting from the 
    proposed temporary tolerances for carfentrazone-ethyl will not exceed 
    the Agency's level of concern.
        2. From drinking water. A chronic dietary risk assessment from 
    drinking water was not conducted because of the short duration of the 
    EUP (2 years) and the small percentage of treated acres for corn and 
    wheat as a result of the proposed use (<1% of="" the="" total="" u.s.="" production="" for="" both="" commodities).="" i.="" acute="" exposure="" and="" risk.="" as="" part="" of="" the="" hazard="" assessment="" process,="" the="" agency="" reviews="" the="" available="" toxicological="" data="" base="" to="" determine="" the="" endpoints="" of="" concern="" for="" acute="" dietary="" risk.="" there="" is="" no="" concern="" since="" the="" available="" data="" do="" not="" indicate="" any="" evidence="" of="" significant="" toxicity="" from="" a="" 1="" day="" or="" single="" event="" exposure="" by="" the="" oral="" route.="" therefore="" an="" acute="" dietary="" risk="" assessment="" was="" not="" required.="" ii.="" chronic="" exposure="" and="" risk.="" because="" the="" agency="" lacks="" sufficient="" water-related="" exposure="" data="" to="" complete="" a="" comprehensive="" drinking="" water="" risk="" assessment="" for="" many="" pesticides,="" epa="" has="" commenced="" and="" nearly="" completed="" a="" process="" to="" identify="" a="" reasonable="" yet="" conservative="" bounding="" figure="" for="" the="" potential="" contribution="" of="" water-related="" exposure="" to="" the="" aggregate="" risk="" posed="" by="" a="" pesticide.="" in="" developing="" the="" bounding="" figure,="" epa="" estimated="" residue="" levels="" in="" water="" for="" a="" number="" of="" specific="" pesticides="" using="" various="" data="" sources.="" the="" agency="" then="" applied="" the="" estimated="" residue="" levels,="" in="" conjunction="" with="" appropriate="" toxicological="" endpoints="" (rfd's="" or="" acute="" dietary="" noel's)="" and="" assumptions="" about="" body="" weight="" and="" consumption,="" to="" calculate,="" for="" each="" pesticide,="" the="" [[page="" 51035]]="" increment="" of="" aggregate="" risk="" contributed="" by="" consumption="" of="" contaminated="" water.="" while="" epa="" has="" not="" yet="" pinpointed="" the="" appropriate="" bounding="" figure="" for="" exposure="" from="" contaminated="" water,="" the="" ranges="" the="" agency="" is="" continuing="" to="" examine="" are="" all="" below="" the="" level="" that="" would="" cause="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" to="" exceed="" the="" rfd="" if="" the="" tolerance="" being="" considered="" in="" this="" document="" were="" granted.="" the="" agency="" has="" therefore="" concluded="" that="" the="" potential="" exposures="" associated="" with="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" in="" water,="" even="" at="" the="" higher="" levels="" the="" agency="" is="" considering="" as="" a="" conservative="" upper="" bound,="" would="" not="" prevent="" the="" agency="" from="" determining="" that="" there="" is="" a="" reasonable="" certainty="" of="" no="" harm="" if="" the="" tolerance="" is="" granted.="" 3.="" from="" non-dietary="" exposure.="" the="" proposed="" uses="" for="" this="" pesticide="" does="" not="" include="" uses="" that="" would="" result="" in="" a="" non-dietary,="" non-="" occupational="" exposure.="" 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.''="" the="" agency="" believes="" that="" ``available="" information''="" in="" this="" context="" might="" include="" not="" only="" toxicity,="" chemistry,="" and="" exposure="" data,="" but="" also="" scientific="" policies="" and="" methodologies="" for="" understanding="" common="" mechanisms="" of="" toxicity="" and="" conducting="" cumulative="" risk="" assessments.="" for="" most="" pesticides,="" although="" the="" agency="" has="" some="" information="" in="" its="" files="" that="" may="" turn="" out="" to="" be="" helpful="" in="" eventually="" determining="" whether="" a="" pesticide="" shares="" a="" common="" mechanism="" of="" toxicity="" with="" any="" other="" substances,="" epa="" does="" not="" at="" this="" time="" have="" the="" methodologies="" to="" resolve="" the="" complex="" scientific="" issues="" concerning="" common="" mechanism="" of="" toxicity="" in="" a="" meaningful="" way.="" epa="" has="" begun="" a="" pilot="" process="" to="" study="" this="" issue="" further="" through="" the="" examination="" of="" particular="" classes="" of="" pesticides.="" the="" agency="" hopes="" that="" the="" results="" of="" this="" pilot="" process="" will="" increase="" the="" agency's="" scientific="" understanding="" of="" this="" question="" such="" that="" epa="" will="" be="" able="" to="" develop="" and="" apply="" scientific="" principles="" for="" better="" determining="" which="" chemicals="" have="" a="" common="" mechanism="" of="" toxicity="" and="" evaluating="" the="" cumulative="" effects="" of="" such="" chemicals.="" the="" agency="" anticipates,="" however,="" that="" even="" as="" its="" understanding="" of="" the="" science="" of="" common="" mechanisms="" increases,="" decisions="" on="" specific="" classes="" of="" chemicals="" will="" be="" heavily="" dependent="" on="" chemical-specific="" data,="" much="" of="" which="" may="" not="" be="" presently="" available.="" although="" at="" present="" the="" agency="" does="" not="" know="" how="" to="" apply="" the="" information="" in="" its="" files="" concerning="" common="" mechanism="" issues="" to="" most="" risk="" assessments,="" there="" are="" pesticides="" as="" to="" which="" the="" common="" mechanism="" issues="" can="" be="" resolved.="" these="" pesticides="" include="" pesticides="" that="" are="" toxicologically="" dissimilar="" to="" existing="" chemical="" substances="" (in="" which="" case="" the="" agency="" can="" conclude="" that="" it="" is="" unlikely="" that="" a="" pesticide="" shares="" a="" common="" mechanism="" of="" activity="" with="" other="" substances)="" and="" pesticides="" that="" produce="" a="" common="" toxic="" metabolite="" (in="" which="" case="" common="" mechanism="" of="" activity="" will="" be="" assumed).="" epa="" does="" not="" have,="" at="" this="" time,="" available="" data="" to="" determine="" whether="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" 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,="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" 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="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" has="" a="" common="" mechanism="" of="" toxicity="" with="" other="" substances.="" d.="" aggregate="" risks="" and="" determination="" of="" safety="" for="" u.s.="" population="" 1.="" acute="" risk.="" the="" agency="" does="" not="" have="" a="" concern="" for="" acute="" dietary="" assessment="" since="" the="" available="" data="" do="" not="" indicate="" any="" evidence="" of="" significant="" toxicity="" from="" a="" 1="" day="" or="" single="" event="" exposure="" by="" the="" oral="" route.="" an="" acute="" dietary="" risk="" assessment="" was="" not="" required.="" 2.="" chronic="" risk.="" the="" chronic="" dietary="" analysis="" indicates="" that="" exposure="" from="" the="" proposed="" temporary="" tolerances="" for="" use="" of="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" in/on="" corn="" and="" wheat="" for="" the="" u.s.="" population="" would="" account="" for="" less="" than="" 1%="" of="" the="" rfd.="" for="" children="" (1-6="" years),="" the="" subgroup="" with="" the="" highest="" exposure,="" 1%="" of="" the="" rfd="" would="" be="" utilized.="" a="" chronic="" dietary="" risk="" (food="" and="" water)="" was="" not="" conducted="" for="" the="" following="" reasons:="" the="" short="" duration="" of="" the="" eup,="" the="" small="" percentage="" of="" treated="" acres="" for="" corn="" and="" wheat="" as="" a="" result="" of="" the="" proposed="" use=""><1% of="" the="" total="" u.s.="" production="" for="" both="" commodities;="" and="" the="" fact="" that="" these="" commodities="" are="" blended="" before="" consumption).="" this="" chronic="" analysis="" for="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" is="" an="" upper-bound="" estimate="" of="" dietary="" exposure="" with="" all="" residues="" at="" tolerance="" level="" and="" assuming="" 100%="" of="" the="" commodities="" to="" be="" treated.="" since="" only="" 4,000="" acres="" of="" wheat="" and="" 4,000="" acres="" of="" corn="" will="" be="" treated="" under="" the="" eup="" program,="" which="" represents="" less="" than="" 1%="" of="" the="" total="" wheat="" and="" corn="" harvested="" in="" the="" united="" states,="" this="" dietary="" analysis="" represents="" an="" over="" estimate="" of="" the="" percent="" rfd="" that="" will="" be="" utilized="" by="" the="" proposed="" temporary="" tolerances.="" therefore,="" the="" chronic="" dietary="" risk="" resulting="" from="" the="" proposed="" temporary="" tolerances="" for="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" will="" not="" exceed="" the="" agency's="" level="" of="" concern.="" epa="" concludes="" that="" there="" is="" a="" reasonable="" certainty="" that="" no="" harm="" will="" result="" from="" aggregate="" exposure="" to="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" residues.="" e.="" aggregate="" cancer="" risk="" for="" u.s.="" population="" the="" chronic="" dietary="" analysis="" indicates="" that="" exposure="" from="" the="" proposed="" temporary="" tolerances="" for="" use="" of="" carfentrazone-ethyl="" in/on="" corn="" and="" wheat="" for="" the="" u.s.="" population="" would="" account="" for="" less="" than="" 1%="" rfd.="" there="" is="" no="" concern="" for="" cancer="" risks="" identified.="" data="" from="" available="" studies="" do="" not="" indicate="" a="" treatment-related="" tumor="" problem,="" and="" cancer="" endpoints="" have="" not="" been="" identified.="" f.="" aggregate="" risks="" and="" determination="" of="" safety="" for="" infants="" and="" children="" 1.="" safety="" factor="" for="" infants="" and="" children--a.="" in="" general.="" in="" assessing="" the="" potential="" for="" additional="" sensitivity="" of="" infants="" and="" children="" to="" residues="" of="" carfentrazone-ethyl,="" epa="" considered="" data="" from="" developmental="" toxicity="" studies="" in="" the="" rat="" and="" rabbit.="" developmental="" toxicity="" studies="" are="" designed="" to="" evaluate="" adverse="" effects="" on="" the="" developing="" organism="" resulting="" from="" pesticide="" exposure="" during="" prenatal="" development="" to="" one="" or="" both="" parents.="" reproduction="" studies="" provide="" information="" relating="" to="" effects="" from="" exposure="" to="" the="" pesticide="" 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="" moe="" analysis="" or="" through="" using="" uncertainty="" (safety)="" factors="" in="" calculating="" a="" dose="" level="" that="" poses="" no="" appreciable="" risk="" to="" humans.="" epa="" believes="" that="" reliable="" data="" support="" using="" the="" standard="" moe="" and="" uncertainty="" factor="" (usually="" 100="" for="" combined="" inter-="" and="" intra-species="" variability)="" and="" not="" the="" additional="" tenfold="" moe/uncertainty="" factor="" when="" epa="" has="" a="" complete="" data="" base="" under="" [[page="" 51036]]="" existing="" guidelines="" and="" when="" the="" severity="" of="" the="" effect="" in="" infants="" or="" children="" or="" the="" potency="" or="" unusual="" toxic="" properties="" of="" a="" compound="" do="" not="" raise="" concerns="" regarding="" the="" adequacy="" of="" the="" standard="" moe/safety="" factor.="" b.="" developmental="" toxicity="" studies.="" i.="" a="" prenatal="" oral="" developmental="" toxicity="" study="" in="" rabbits="" with="" dose="" levels="" of="" 0,="" 10,="" 40,="" 150,="" or="" 300="" mg/kg/day="" with="" a="" maternal="" loel="" of="" 300/mg/kg/day="" and="" the="" maternal="" noel="" of="">150 mg/kg/day. There was not evidence of treatment-
    related prenatal developmental toxicity.
        ii. A prenatal oral developmental toxicity study in the rat at dose 
    levels of 0, 100, 600, or 1,250 mg/kg/day with a maternal LOEL of 600 
    mg/kg/day based on staining of the abdominogential area and of the cage 
    pan liner; and with the maternal NOEL of 100 mg/kg/day. The 
    developmental NOEL of 1,250 mg/kg/day was based upon a significant 
    increase in the litter incidences of wavy and thickened ribs and with 
    the developmental NOEL of 600 mg/kg/day.
        c. Reproductive toxicity study. Under Title 40 of the Code of 
    Federal Regulations, part 158, Sec. 158.340, a 2-generation 
    reproduction study is not required for an EUP when the TMRC is less 
    than 50% of the RfD. Exposure from the proposed temporary tolerance of 
    carafentrazone-ethyl from use on wheat and corn will account for less 
    than 1% of the RfD.
        d. Pre- and post-natal sensitivity. There was no evidence of pre-
    and post-natal sensitivity in the prenatal oral developmental studies 
    discussed above.
        e. Conclusion. All required toxicology studies have been completed 
    for this phase of the registration process. The required developmental 
    studies show no pre-natal sensitivity. Based on these findings as well 
    as the generally low toxicity seen in all of the carfentrazone studies, 
    EPA concludes there is reliable data supporting not using an additional 
    10-fold safety factor for the protection of infants and children. EPA 
    believes the 1,000-fold safety factor used in assessing the 
    carfentrazone risk is adequate to protect all consumers. The 1,000-fold 
    safety factor includes a 100-fold factor for intra- and inter-species 
    differences and a 10-fold factor because the RfD was based on 
    subchronic study.
        2. Chronic risk. EPA has concluded that aggregate exposure to 
    carfentrazone-ethyl from food will utilize 1% of the RfD for infants 
    and children. EPA generally has no concern for exposures below 100% of 
    the RfD because the RfD represents the level at or below which daily 
    aggregate dietary exposure over a lifetime will not pose appreciable 
    risks to human health. Despite the potential for exposure to 
    carfentrazone-ethyl in drinking water and from non-dietary, non-
    occupational exposure, EPA does not expect the aggregate exposure to 
    exceed 100% of the RfD. EPA concludes that there is a reasonable 
    certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from 
    aggregate exposure to carfentrazone-ethyl residues.
    
    III. Other Considerations
    
    A. Metabolism in Plants and Animals
    
        The metabolism of carfentrazone-ethyl in plants is adequately 
    understood for the purposes of these tolerances. For the purposes of 
    the EUP, the residues of concern are the parent carfentrazone-ethyl and 
    its two major metabolites. The nature of the residue in animals has not 
    been reported. Due to the non-quantifiable carfentrazone-ethyl residues 
    in/on the treated RACs, except wheat forage (there is a label feeding 
    restriction in the EUP) fed to livestock and the limited number of 
    acres involved, there is no expectation of secondary residues in 
    livestock commodities of meat, meat-by-products, fat, milk, and eggs.
    
    B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology
    
        There is a practical analytical method for detecting and measuring 
    levels of carfentrazone and its metabolites in or on food with a limit 
    of detection that allows monitoring of food with residues at or above 
    the levels set in these tolerances. The proposed analytical method for 
    determining residues is hydrolysis followed by gas chromatographic 
    separation. For the parent carfentrazone-ethyl, acceptable method 
    recoveries were established at a limit of quantitation (LOQ) of 0.05 
    ppm, and a limit of detection (LOD) was set at 0.01 ppm for all the 
    field corn and wheat crop matrices. The methodology can also be used to 
    determine major plant metabolites with similar LOQs and LODs. No 
    analytical method for meat, milk and eggs has been submitted by the 
    registrant. Since no temporary tolerances have been proposed for animal 
    RACs, an analytical enforcement method for animals is not required for 
    the EUP.
    
    C. Magnitude of Residues
    
        The magnitude of the residue in animals has not been reported. 
    These data will not be required for the EUP due to the non-quantifiable 
    carfentrazone-ethyl residues in/on treated RACs (corn forage, fodder, 
    and grain, and wheat hay, straw, and grain) fed to livestock and the 
    limited number of acres involved. Residues were only found in wheat 
    forage, therefore for the EUP only, a grazing restriction must be 
    included to prohibit the grazing and harvesting of wheat forage as a 
    feedstuff.
    
    D. International Residue Limits
    
        There is no Codex proposal, no Canadian or Mexican limits for 
    residues of carfentrazone-ethyl in corn or wheat. A compatibility issue 
    is not relevant to the proposed tolerances for either crop.
    
    IV. Conclusion
    
        Therefore, the temporary tolerance is established for combined 
    residues of carfentrazone (ethyl-alpha-2-dichloro-5-[4-
    (difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl]-4-
    fluorobenzenepropanoate) and its metabolites in wheat at 0.20 ppm and 
    corn at 0.15 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 December 1, 1997, 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 above (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
    
    [[Page 51037]]
    
    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-300554 (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 Room 1132 of the Public Information and Records 
    Integrity Branch, Information Resources and Services Division (7506C), 
    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: 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 temporary tolerance under FFDCA 
    section 408(d) in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The 
    Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of 
    actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory 
    Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). 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 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 these tolerances and exemptions that are 
    established on the basis of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such 
    as the temporary tolerance in this final rule, do not require the 
    issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory 
    Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not apply. 
    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.
    
    VIII. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
    
        Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), as added by the Small Business 
    Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, the Agency has submitted 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 General Accounting Office prior to publication of this rule in 
    today's Federal Register. This 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: September 22, 1997.
    Stephen L. Johnson,
    Acting Director, 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. 346a and 371.
    
        2. By adding Sec. 180.515, to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 180.515   Carfentrazone-ethyl; temporary tolerances for residues.
    
        (a) General. Temporary tolerances are established for combined 
    residues of the herbicide carfentrazone-ethyl (ethyl-alpha-2-dichloro-
    5-[4-(difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-
    yl]-4-fluorobenzenepropanoate) and its major wheat metabolites 
    carfentrazone-ethyl chloropropionic acid (alpha,2-dichloro-5-[4-
    difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl]-4-
    fluorobenzenepropanoic acid),3-hydroxymethyl-F8426-chloropropionic acid 
    (alpha,2-dichloro-5-[4-difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-hydroxymethyl-5-
    oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl]-4-fluorobenzenepropanoic acid) and 3-
    desmethyl-F8426 chloropropionic acid (alpha,2-dichloro-5-[4-
    difluoromethyl)-4,5-dihydro-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl]-4-
    fluorobenzenepropanoic acid) and in or on the following food 
    commodities:
    
                                                                            
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Expiration/
                       Commodity                     Parts per    revocation
                                                      million        date   
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Corn fodder...................................         0.15       5/8/98
    Corn forage...................................         0.15       5/8/98
    Corn grain....................................         0.15       5/8/98
    Wheat hay.....................................          0.2       5/8/98
    Wheat grain...................................          0.2       5/8/98
    Wheat straw...................................          0.2       5/8/98
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
        (c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
    
    [[Page 51038]]
    
        (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]
    
    [FR Doc. 97-25891 Filed 9-29-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
9/30/1997
Published:
09/30/1997
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
97-25891
Dates:
This regulation is effective September 30, 1997. Objections and requests for hearings must be received by EPA on or before December 1, 1997.
Pages:
51032-51038 (7 pages)
Docket Numbers:
OPP-300554, FRL-5744-8
RINs:
2070-AB78
PDF File:
97-25891.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 180.515