[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 39 (Wednesday, February 27, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13257-13264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04555]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1002; FRL-9379-6]


Pyraflufen-ethyl; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of 
pyraflufen-ethyl in or on multiple commodities which are identified and 
discussed later in this document. Nichino America, Inc. requested these 
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective February 27, 2013. Objections and 
requests for hearings must be received on or before April 29, 2013, and 
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR 
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket 
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1002, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory 
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency 
Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution 
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open 
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal 
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 
566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (703) 305-
5805. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information 
about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bethany Benbow, Registration Division

[[Page 13258]]

(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone 
number: (703) 347-8072; email address: benbow.bethany@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an 
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. 
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System 
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. 
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's 
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government 
Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an 
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a 
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a 
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided 
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify 
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1002 in the subject line on the first 
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must 
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before 
April 29, 2013. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and 
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the 
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of 
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for 
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential 
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without 
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing 
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1002, by one of 
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit 
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business 
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted 
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket 
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand 
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the 
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.

Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along 
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of March 14, 2012 (77 FR 15012) (FRL-9335-
9), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 
U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 
1F7944) by Nichino America, Inc., 4550 New Linden Hill Road Suite 501, 
Wilmington, DE 19808. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.585 be 
amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide 
pyraflufen-ethyl, ethyl 2-[2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy)-1-
methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-yl]-4-fluorophenoxy] acetate and its acid 
metabolite, E-1, 2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy-1-methyl-1H-
pyrazol-3-yl)-4-fluorophenoxyacetic acid, expressed in terms of the 
parent, in or on hop, dried cone at 0.01 parts per million (ppm); 
peanut at 0.01 ppm; peanut, hay at 0.07 ppm; peanut, meal at 0.01 ppm; 
and peanut, refined oil at 0.01 ppm. That document referenced a summary 
of the petition prepared by Nichino America, Inc., the registrant, 
which is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There 
were no comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is 
establishing tolerances for peanut and peanut, hay but not establishing 
tolerances for hop, dried cone; peanut, meal; or peanut, refined oil. 
In addition, the current time-limited tolerances established for 
combined residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and metabolite E-1 in milk and 
the meat by-products of cattle, goat, horse, and sheep at 0.02 ppm are 
being revised to permanent tolerances for combined residues of 
pyraflufen-ethyl and metabolites E-1 and E-9 at 0.03 ppm. Finally, 
permanent tolerances for combined residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and 
metabolites E-1 and E-9 are also being set for the fat and meat of 
cattle, goat, horse, and sheep at 0.03 ppm. The reasons for these 
changes are explained in Unit IV.C.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a 
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a 
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a 
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure 
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary 
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable 
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in 
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. 
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special 
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide 
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there 
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and 
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. * * 
*''
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors 
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available 
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this 
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a 
determination on aggregate exposure for pyraflufen-ethyl including 
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action. 
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with pyraflufen-
ethyl 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. Pyraflufen-ethyl exhibits relatively low acute toxicity from 
oral, dermal, and inhalation exposure. It produces moderate eye

[[Page 13259]]

irritation and is not a dermal irritant or a dermal sensitizer. 
Following repeated short-term and chronic oral dosing, the liver, 
kidney, and hematopoietic system are the target organs for pyraflufen-
ethyl in the rat and/or mouse. The rabbit appears to be the most 
sensitive species in the toxicity database with adverse effects, 
including mortality. Adverse effects were not noted in the dog 
following oral exposure or in the rat following dermal exposure. There 
was no evidence of increased susceptibility following pre-natal 
exposure to rats and rabbits in the developmental toxicity studies or 
following pre- and post-natal exposure to rats in the multi-generation 
reproduction study. Although not mutagenic in the mutagenicity battery 
or carcinogenic in the rat, pyraflufen-ethyl is classified as ``Likely 
to be Carcinogenic to Humans'' due to a compound-related increase in 
incidence of hepatocellular adenomas, carcinomas, and/or 
hepatoblastomas in male and female mice. A linear low-dose 
extrapolation approach is used to estimate human cancer risk 
(Q1*) based on combined hepatocellular adenomas, carcinomas, 
and/or hepatoblastomas seen in male mice.
    Since the last risk assessment, the neurotoxicity battery was 
reviewed and determined to be negative for both acute and subchronic 
neurotoxicity. Additionally, the Agency reviewed an immunotoxicity 
study that showed a decreased immune response (decreases of anti-sheep 
red blood cell (SRBC) antibody forming cell (AFC) response in male 
rats), only at a dose level approaching the limit dose.
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the 
adverse effects caused by pyraflufen-ethyl as well as the no observed 
adverse effect levels (NOAELs) and the lowest observed adverse effect 
levels (LOAELs) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document Pyraflufen-ethyl--Human Health Risk 
Assessment for a Section 3 Registration of New Food Uses on Hops and 
Peanuts at pages 44-48 in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1002.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA 
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of 
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the 
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no 
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for 
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed 
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to 
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) 
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified 
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with 
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a 
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe 
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes 
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the 
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of 
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the 
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete 
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for pyraflufen-ethyl used 
for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.

     Table 1--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Pyraflufen-ethyl for Use in Human Health Risk
                                                   Assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Study and
         Exposure/scenario               Point of departure and         RfD, PAD, LOC for       toxicological
                                       uncertainty/safety factors        risk assessment           effects
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acute dietary (General population                            None                           An endpoint
 including infants and children).                                                            attributable to a
                                                                                             single dose was not
                                                                                             identified for
                                                                                             pyraflufen-ethyl
                                                                                             from the available
                                                                                             data.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronic dietary (All populations).  NOAEL = 20 mg/kg/day............  Chronic RfD = 0.20    Mouse
                                    UFA = 10x.......................   mg/kg/day.            carcinogenicity
                                    UFH = 10x.......................  cPAD = 0.20 mg/kg/     study.
                                    FQPA SF = 1x....................   day..                LOAEL = 98 mg/kg/day
                                                                                             based on liver
                                                                                             toxicity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidental oral short-term (1 to    NOAEL = 20 mg/kg/day............  LOC for MOE = 100...  Developmental
 30 days).                          UFA = 10x.......................                         toxicity--rabbit.
                                    UFH = 10x.......................                        Maternal LOAEL = 60
                                    FQPA SF = 1x....................                         mg/kg/day based on
                                                                                             decreases in body
                                                                                             weight and food
                                                                                             consumption,
                                                                                             gastrointestinal
                                                                                             (GI) observations,
                                                                                             and abortions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dermal short-term (1 to 30 days);                            None                           28-day dermal
 Dermal intermediate-term (1 to 6                                                            toxicity--rats.
 months).                                                                                   No dermal or
                                                                                             systemic toxicity
                                                                                             was seen at the
                                                                                             limit dose (1,000
                                                                                             mg/kg/day).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 13260]]

 
Inhalation short-term (1 to 30      Inhalation (or oral) study NOAEL  Residential LOC for   Developmental
 days) and Intermediate and long     = 20 mg/kg/day (inhalation        MOE = 100.            toxicity-rabbit.
 term (1-6 months).                  absorption rate = 100%).                               LOAEL = 60 mg/kg/day
                                    UFA = 10x.......................                         based on decreases
                                    UFH = 10x.......................                         in body weight and
                                    FQPA SF = 1x....................                         food consumption,
                                                                                             GI observations,
                                                                                             and abortions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).   Classification: ``Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans'' by the oral route.
                                                           Q1* = 3.32 x 10-2 (mg/kg/day)-1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. LOC = level
  of concern. mg/kg/day = milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no observed adverse effect
  level. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor.
  UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among
  members of the human population (intraspecies).

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary 
exposure to pyraflufen-ethyl, EPA considered exposure under the 
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing pyraflufen-ethyl 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.585. EPA assessed dietary exposures from 
pyraflufen-ethyl in food as follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk 
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological 
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring 
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. No such effects were 
identified in the toxicological studies for pyraflufen-ethyl; 
therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is 
unnecessary.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure 
assessment EPA used the food consumption data from the U.S. Department 
of Agriculture's (USDA) National Health and Nutrition Examination 
Survey, What We Eat in America (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in 
food, EPA incorporated all current and proposed tolerances for combined 
residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and metabolite E-1 in plants and residues 
of pyraflufen-ethyl, metabolite E-1 and metabolite E-9 in animals and 
assumed 100% of crops were treated. The commodities of corn, wheat, 
soybeans, cottonseed, potatoes, pome fruit, stone fruit, pomegranates, 
olives, grapes, tree nuts, and pistachios were analyzed at \1/2\ the 
combined levels of quantitation (LOQs) of the parent and metabolites 
for the residue values in the dietary assessment because the field 
trials showed that residues were lower than the LOQ. All other 
established and proposed commodities were analyzed using tolerance-
level residues. Because the commodity-specific processing studies did 
not show pyraflufen-ethyl concentration after processing, the chronic 
dietary exposure assessment did not incorporate processing factors for 
the following commodities: Treated corn grain, soybean seeds, wheat 
grain, apples, and grapes. However, default processing factors were 
used for dry potatoes (6.5X), peanut butter (1.89X), dried beef 
(1.92X), and corn syrup (1.5X). An empirical processing factor of 0.6X 
was used for cotton seed oil. The anticipated residue in meat, milk, 
fat, and meat byproducts was calculated to be 0.001 ppm. Chronic (non-
cancer) dietary exposure from drinking water was determined based on a 
Tier 2 (surface water) drinking water estimate provided by the 
Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED). The chronic (annual 
average) estimate for drinking water was incorporated directly into the 
dietary assessment for the combined residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and 
its metabolic products, E-1, E-2, and E-3, which are the major residues 
present in the supporting studies.
    iii. Cancer. Pyraflufen-ethyl is classified as ``Likely to be 
Carcinogenic to Humans'' by the oral route; therefore, a cancer dietary 
risk assessment was conducted. EPA determines whether quantitative 
cancer exposure and risk assessments are appropriate for a food-use 
pesticide based on the weight of the evidence from cancer studies and 
other relevant data. If quantitative cancer risk assessment is 
appropriate, cancer risk may be quantified using a linear or nonlinear 
approach. If sufficient information on the carcinogenic mode of action 
is available, a threshold or nonlinear approach is used and a cancer 
RfD is calculated based on an earlier noncancer key event. If 
carcinogenic mode of action data are not available, or if the mode of 
action data determines a mutagenic mode of action, a default linear 
cancer slope factor approach is utilized. Based on the data summarized 
in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that pyraflufen-ethyl should be 
classified as ``Likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans'' and a linear 
approach has been used to quantify cancer risk.
    All exposure inputs for the cancer assessment were the same as for 
the chronic dietary exposure assessment, except the estimated drinking 
water concentrations (EDWC). A Tier 2 drinking water (surface water) of 
a (30-year average) estimate for pyraflufen-ethyl and its metabolic 
products, E-1, E-2, and E-3, was incorporated directly into the dietary 
assessment to estimate chronic carcinogenic risk from drinking water 
containing pyraflufen-ethyl.
    iv. Anticipated residue information. Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA 
authorizes EPA to use available data and information on the anticipated 
residue levels of pesticide residues in food and the actual levels of 
pesticide residues that have been measured in food. If EPA relies on 
such information, EPA must require pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) 
that data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is established, 
modified, or left in effect, demonstrating that the levels in food are 
not above the levels anticipated. For the present action, EPA will 
issue such data call-ins as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) 
and authorized under FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to 
be submitted no later than 5 years from the date of issuance of these 
tolerances.

[[Page 13261]]

    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening 
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk 
assessment for pyraflufen-ethyl in drinking water. These simulation 
models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of pyraflufen-ethyl. Further information 
regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure 
assessment can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm.
    Based on the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling 
System (PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-
GROW) models, the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of 
pyraflufen-ethyl acute exposures are estimated to be 0.640 parts per 
billion (ppb) for surface water and 0.0018 ppb for ground water. The 
estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of pyraflufen-ethyl for 
non-cancer chronic exposures are estimated to be 0.295 ppb for surface 
water and 0.0018 ppb for ground water. The EDWCs of pyraflufen-ethyl 
for chronic exposures for cancer assessments are estimated to be 0.268 
ppb for surface water and 0.0018 ppb for ground water.
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly 
entered into the dietary exposure model. For chronic dietary risk 
assessment, the water concentration of value 0.295 ppb was used to 
assess the contribution to drinking water. For cancer dietary risk 
assessment, the water concentration of value 0.268 ppb was used to 
assess the contribution to drinking water.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is 
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary 
exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, 
termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets).
    Pyraflufen-ethyl is currently registered for the following uses 
that could result in residential exposures: Established ornamental turf 
lawns (residential, industrial, and institutional), parks, cemeteries, 
athletic fields, golf courses, sod farms, nurseries, ornamental 
plantings, and Christmas trees. EPA assessed residential handler 
exposure using the following assumptions: (1) Most residential uses 
will result in short-term (1-30 day) exposures, (2) residential 
handlers are assumed to be wearing short-sleeved shirts, short pants, 
shoes, and socks during pyraflufen-ethyl application, (3) various 
application methods may be used such as manually pressurized handwands, 
backpack sprayers, and hose-end sprayers.
    When determining the potential for residential post-application 
exposure, the Agency considers residues from leaf to skin/hand residue 
transfer, children's hand-to-mouth transfer, and exposure time. Because 
exposure to treated gardens and turf could be expected within the same 
day, adult post-application cancer exposure to treated trees and retail 
plants and turf were combined. The exposure assessment for treated 
plants is considered extremely conservative in that the plants are 
assumed to be treated the same day that residential post-application 
contact occurs, with no residue transfer between treatment and purchase 
of the plants. Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions 
and generic inputs for residential exposures may be found at http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/science/USEPA-OPP-HED_Residential%20SOPs_Oct2012.pdf.
    4. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of 
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when 
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the 
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative 
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances 
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' EPA has not found 
pyraflufen-ethyl to share a common mechanism of toxicity with any other 
substances, and pyraflufen-ethyl does not appear to produce a toxic 
metabolite which is also produced by other substances. For the purposes 
of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that pyraflufen-
ethyl does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other 
substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which 
chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the 
cumulative effects of such chemicals, see EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA 
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants 
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal 
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity 
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a 
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This 
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety 
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default 
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when 
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different 
factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no evidence of 
increased susceptibility of rat or rabbit fetuses following in utero 
exposure in the developmental studies with pyraflufen-ethyl. There is 
no evidence of increased susceptibility of young rats in the 
pyraflufen-ethyl reproduction study and there are no residual 
uncertainties for pre- and/or postnatal exposure.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the 
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the 
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following 
findings:
    i. The toxicity database for pyraflufen-ethyl is complete.
    ii. There is no indication that pyraflufen-ethyl is a neurotoxic 
chemical and there is no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study 
or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. There is no evidence that pyraflufen-ethyl results in 
increased susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits in the prenatal 
developmental studies or in young rats in the 2-generation reproduction 
study.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure 
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based 
on 100% crop treated (CT) and tolerance-level residues for the proposed 
commodities, and residue inputs of \1/2\ LOQ as refined estimates of 
the currently registered commodities. EPA made conservative 
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used 
to assess exposure to pyraflufen-ethyl in drinking water. EPA used 
similarly conservative assumptions to assess post-application exposure 
of adults and children as well as incidental oral exposure of children. 
In addition, the residential exposure assessment is based on the 
updated 2012 Residential Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) employing 
surrogate study data, including conservative exposure assumptions based 
on day 0 dermal/oral contact to turf and surfaces treated at the 
maximum application rate. These data are reliable and are not expected 
to underestimate risks to adults or children. The Residential SOPs are 
based upon reasonable ``worst-case'' assumptions and are not expected 
to underestimate risk. Although some of the residue values used in the 
dietary exposure assessment were refined, these assessments will not 
underestimate the exposure and risks posed by pyraflufen-ethyl.

[[Page 13262]]

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide 
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the 
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA 
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the 
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term 
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, 
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an 
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into 
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and 
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure 
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore, 
pyraflufen-ethyl is not expected to pose an acute risk.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this 
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to 
pyraflufen-ethyl from food and water will utilize < 1% of the cPAD for 
children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the greatest 
exposure. Based on the explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding 
residential use patterns, chronic residential exposure to residues of 
pyraflufen-ethyl is not expected.
    3. Short-term risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into 
account short-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food 
and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Pyraflufen-
ethyl is currently registered for uses that could result in short-term 
residential exposure, and the Agency has determined that it is 
appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with 
short-term residential exposures to pyraflufen-ethyl.
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short-
term exposures, EPA has concluded the combined chronic dietary and 
short-term residential exposures result in an adult (inhalation) non-
cancer aggregate MOE of 290,000. The aggregate MOE for children 1-2 
years old, including incidental oral exposures from treated turf, is 
9,600. Because EPA's level of concern for pyraflufen-ethyl is a MOE of 
100 or below, these MOEs are not of concern.
    4. Intermediate-term risk. Intermediate-term aggregate exposure 
takes into account intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic 
exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure 
level). An intermediate-term adverse effect was identified; however, 
pyraflufen-ethyl is not registered for any use patterns that would 
result in intermediate-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term 
risk is assessed based on intermediate-term residential exposure plus 
chronic dietary exposure. Because there is no intermediate-term 
residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has already been 
assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is at least as 
protective as the POD used to assess intermediate-term risk), no 
further assessment of intermediate-term risk is necessary, and EPA 
relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating 
intermediate-term risk for pyraflufen-ethyl.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. The aggregate cancer 
risk assessment for the general U.S. population considers exposure 
estimates from dietary consumption of pyraflufen-ethyl in food and 
drinking water and exposure through residential uses of pyraflufen-
ethyl. Exposures from residential uses are based on the lifetime 
average daily dose and assume an exposure period of 2 days per year and 
35 years of exposure over a 78 year lifetime. Average food and water 
exposure to pyraflufen-ethyl was used in the aggregate assessment. 
Estimated cancer risk for the general U.S. population includes infants 
and children; therefore, a children's cancer risk estimate was not 
reported separately. The aggregate cancer risk estimate for pyraflufen-
ethyl is 2.6 x 10 -6. EPA generally considers cancer risks 
in the range of one in one million (1 x 10 -6) or less to be 
negligible. The precision that can be assumed for cancer risk estimates 
is best described by rounding to the nearest integral order of 
magnitude on the log scale; for example, risks falling between 3 x 10 
-7 and 3 x 10 -6 are expressed as risks in the 
range of 10-6. Considering the precision with which cancer 
hazard can be estimated, the conservativeness of low-dose linear 
extrapolation, and the rounding procedure just described, cancer risk 
should generally not be assumed to exceed the benchmark level of 
concern of the range of 10 -6 until the calculated risk 
exceeds approximately 3 x 10 -6. This is particularly the 
case where some conservatism is maintained in the exposure assessment. 
Although the pyraflufen-ethyl exposure risk assessment is somewhat 
refined, it retains significant conservatism due, among other things, 
to the assumption that 100% of registered crops are treated in the 
dietary cancer assessment and 100% dermal absorption was assumed in the 
residential exposure cancer assessment. Accordingly, EPA has concluded 
the cancer risk for all existing pyraflufen-ethyl uses and the uses 
associated with the tolerances established in this action falls within 
the range of 1 x 10 -6 to 3 x 10 -6 and is thus 
negligible. Therefore, the aggregate cancer risk estimate from 
pyraflufen-ethyl residues in food and drinking water is not of concern 
for the general U.S. population.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA 
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result 
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate 
exposure to pyraflufen-ethyl residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology (gas chromatography-mass 
spectrometry (GC/MS)) is available to enforce the tolerance expression.
    The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry 
Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 
20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address: 
residuemethods@epa.gov.

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. 
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent 
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA 
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established 
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA 
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations 
Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food 
standards program, and it is recognized as an international food safety 
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United 
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from 
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain 
the reasons for departing from the Codex level. The Codex has not 
established a MRL for pyraflufen-ethyl.

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    Based on a lack of adequate residue data, the Agency is not 
granting tolerances for hops at this time. As permitted under 40 CFR 
180.8, the petitioner has withdrawn its request for hop, dried cone 
tolerances.

[[Page 13263]]

    In addition, the requested tolerances for peanut, meal and peanut, 
refined oil are not being granted since those residues will be covered 
by the proposed tolerance for peanut. Because peanut hay is fed to 
livestock and may affect residue levels, upon review of the data 
supporting the petitions, EPA determined that several livestock 
tolerances should be revised (from residues of the parent and 
metabolite E-1 in milk and meat by-products of cattle, goat, horse, and 
sheep at 0.02 ppm to residues of the parent and metabolites E-1 and E-9 
at 0.03 ppm) and several new livestock tolerances should be established 
(residues of the parent and metabolites E-1 and E-9 in the fat and meat 
of cattle, goat, horse and sheep at 0.03 ppm). The Agency revised these 
tolerance levels based on analysis of the residue field trial data 
using the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) 
tolerance calculation.
    Finally, based on data submitted with this petition, EPA is 
removing the time-limitations for these tolerances.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, permanent tolerances are established for the combined 
residues of pyraflufen-ethyl, metabolite E-1, and metabolite E-9 in or 
on (cattle, goat, horse, sheep) fat, meat, and meat by-products at 0.03 
ppm; milk at 0.03 ppm; and new tolerances are established for the 
combined residues of pyraflufen-ethyl and metabolite E-1 in or on 
peanut at 0.01 ppm; and peanut, hay at 0.07 ppm.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes tolerances 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). Because this final rule has 
been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this final rule 
is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This 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.), nor does it require any 
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal 
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and 
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis 
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this 
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the 
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.), do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food 
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this 
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and 
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions 
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that 
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or 
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government 
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has 
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled 
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition, 
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any 
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would 
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant 
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), 
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required 
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and 
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of 
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' 
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 20, 2013.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.


0
2. In Sec.  180.585, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  180.585  Pyraflufen-ethyl; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. Tolerances are established for residues of the 
herbicide, pyraflufen-ethyl, including its metabolites and degradates, 
in the commodities in the table below. Compliance with the plant 
commodity tolerance levels specified in the table is to be determined 
by measuring only the sum of the parent pyraflufen-ethyl, ethyl 2-[2-
chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-yl]-4-
fluorophenoxy] acetate, and its acid metabolite, E-1, 2-chloro-5-(4-
chloro-5-difluoromethoxy-1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-yl)-4-
fluorophenoxyacetic acid, calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent 
of pyraflufen-ethyl in or on the commodity. Compliance with the 
livestock commodity tolerance levels specified in the table is to be 
determined by measuring only the sum of the parent pyraflufen-ethyl, 
ethyl 2-[2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy)-1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-
yl]-4-fluorophenoxy] acetate and its acid metabolites: E-1, 2-chloro-5-
(4-chloro-5-difluoromethoxy-1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-yl)-4-
fluorophenoxyacetic acid, and E-9, 2-chloro-5-(4-chloro-5-
difluoromethoxy-1H-pyrazol-3-yl)-4-fluorophenoxyacetic acid, both 
calculated as the stoichiometric equivalent of pyraflufen-ethyl in or 
on the commodity.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almond, hulls...............................................        0.02
Cattle, fat.................................................        0.03
Cattle, meat................................................        0.03
Cattle, meat byproducts.....................................        0.03
Corn, field, forage.........................................        0.01
Corn, field, grain..........................................        0.01
Corn, field, stover.........................................        0.01
Cotton, gin byproducts......................................         1.5
Cotton, undelinted seed.....................................        0.04
Fruit, pome, group 11-10....................................        0.01
Fruit, stone, group 12......................................        0.01
Goat, fat...................................................        0.03

[[Page 13264]]

 
Goat, meat..................................................        0.03
Goat, meat byproducts.......................................        0.03
Grape.......................................................        0.01
Grass, forage, group 17.....................................         1.0
Grass, hay, group 17........................................         1.4
Horse, fat..................................................        0.03
Horse, meat.................................................        0.03
Horse, meat byproducts......................................        0.03
Milk........................................................        0.03
Nut, tree, group 14.........................................        0.01
Olive.......................................................        0.01
Peanut......................................................        0.01
Peanut, hay.................................................        0.07
Pistachio...................................................        0.01
Pomegranate.................................................        0.01
Potato......................................................        0.02
Sheep, fat..................................................        0.03
Sheep, meat.................................................        0.03
Sheep, meat byproducts......................................        0.03
Soybean, forage.............................................        0.05
Soybean, hay................................................        0.10
Soybean, seed...............................................        0.01
Wheat, forage...............................................        0.02
Wheat, grain................................................        0.01
Wheat, hay..................................................        0.01
Wheat, straw................................................        0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-04555 Filed 2-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P