# i

EPA REGISTRATION DIVISION CO MPANY NOTICE OF FILING FOR

PESTICIDE PETITIONS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER

EPA Registration Division contact: [James A. Tompkins. 703-305-5697]

INSTRUCTIONS: Please utilize this outline in p reparing the pesticide petition. In

cases where the outline element does not apply, please insert “NA-Remove” and

maintain the outline. Please do not chan ge the margins, font, or format in your pesticide petition. Simply replace the instructions that appear in green , i.e., “ [insert company name] ,” with the information specific to your action.

TEMPLATE:

[ Monsanto Company]

[9F7644]

EPA has received a pesticide petition ([9F7644]) from [Monsanto Company], [1300 I St., NW., Suite 450 East, Washington DC 20052] proposing, pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug, a nd Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40 CFR part 180. 364

(Options (pick one)

1. by establishing a tolerance for residues of

2. to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for NA-Remove

[glyphosate N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine] in or on the raw agricultural commodity [corn, sweet, forage] at [9] parts per million (ppm). [In addition, PP 9F7644 requests revision of the glyphosate to lerance in or on the raw agricultural commodity corn, sweet, kernels plus co b with husks removed at 3 ppm and correction of the glyphosate tolerance in the commodity poultry, meat from 4 ppm to 0.1 ppm.] EPA has determined that the petition c ontains data or information regarding the elements set forth in section 408 (d)(2 ) of FDDCA; however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether the data supports granting of the petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on the petition.

A. Residue Chemistry

1. Plant metabolism. [The qualitative nature of glyphosate residues in plants and livestock is adequately understood. Th e terminal residue to be regulated in nontransgenic plants and transgenic crops modified to express the Agrobacterium

sp. EPSPS and oxireductase genes is glyphosate per se . For crops (currently2

soybeans and corn) that have a transg enic variety engineered to express the microbial glyphosate acetyltransferase ge ne (gat4601), the combined residues to be regulated are glyphosate and N -acetyl-glyphosate. The qualitative nature of the glyphosate residue will not be changed as a result of the proposed tolerance changes. Glyphosate herbicides are not applied direct ly to livestock, so the only potential exposure is via glyphosate residues in their diet. On December 3, 2008, EPA published a final rule (EPA-HQ-OPP- 2007-0147; FRL-8385-7) amending section

180.364 to reflect that the terminal residue to be regulated in livestock (and in soybean commodities and grain aspirated fractions) is glyphosate and its metabolite

N -acetyl-glyphosate, expressed as glyphosate.]

2. Analytical method. [Adequate enforcement methods are available for analysis of residues of gl yphosate and its metabolite AMPA in or on plant and

livestock commodities. These methods incl ude gas liquid chromatography (GLC), Method I in Pesticides Analytical Manual (PAM) II (0.05 ppm limit of detection), and High Performance Liquid Chromatogr aphy (HPLC) with fluorometric detection (0.0005 ppm limit of detection). Us e of the GLC method is discouraged due to the lengthiness of the experimental procedure. The HPLC procedure has undergone successful Agency validation and was recommended for inclusion in PAM II. A gas chromatography/mass spectro metry (GC/MS) method for glyphosate in crops has also been validated by EPA’s Analytical Chemistry Laboratory (ACL). Thus, adequate analytical methods are ava ilable for residue data collection and enforcement of the proposed tolerances for glyphosate.]

3. Magnitude of residues. [Residue data submitted with this petition support the proposed tolerances for the agricultural commodities corn, sweet, forage at 9 ppm and corn, sweet, kernel plus cob wi th husks removed at 3 ppm. Any secondary residues occurring in livestock commodities will be covered by existing tolerances. Currently availabl e residue data support the proposed revision of the tolerance for glyphosate in the agricultural commodity poultry, meat.]

B. Toxicological Profile [The existing toxicity database for glypho sate is complete and without data gaps. There is high confidence in the quality of th e existing studies and the reliability of the toxicity endpoints identified for use in risk assessment. EPA has considered available information regarding the varia bility of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children.

1. Acute toxicity. [The nature of the acute toxic effects caused by glyphosate has been evaluated by the Agency. Glyphosa te is of low acute toxicity by oral, dermal, and ocular routes of exposure, as all studies are in Toxicity Category III or

IV. Acute oral toxicity of glyphosate in the rat and dermal toxicity in the rabbit are both greater than 5000 mg/kg (Toxicity Category IV) and any corneal opacity or irritation caused by glyphosate is temporar y and clears up in 7 or less days (Toxicity Category III). Glyphosate is a mild skin i rritant (Toxicity Cate gory IV) and is not a

dermal sensitizer. The acute inhalation study for glyphosate was waived due to glyphosate being a nonvolatile solid. An acute dietary endpoint for use in human3

health risk assessments was not selected for the general population, since an appropriate endpoint attributable to a si ngle exposure was not identified in the toxicology data base.

Table 1 Acute Toxicity Profile - Test Substance

Guideline

No. Study Type MRID(s) Results Toxicity Category

870.1100 Acute oral 41400601 LD 50 > 5,000 mg/kg IV

870.1200 Acute dermal 41400602 LD 50 > 5,000 mg/kg IV

870.1300 Acute inhalation None The requirement for an

acute inhalation LC 50 study was waived None

870.2400 Acute eye irritation 41400603 Corneal opacity or irritation clearing in 7 days or less III

870.2500 Acute dermal irritation 41400604 M ild or slight irritant IV

870.2600 Skin sensitization 00137138 Not a sensitizer None

]

2. Genotoxicity. [ In vitro and in vivo genotoxicity studies have been conducted with glyphosate. Short term assays for ge notoxicity consisting of a bacterial reverse mutation assay (Ames test), an in vitro assay for cytogenetic damage using Chinese hamster ovary cells, and in vivo cytogeni c assay in rat bone marrow have been conducted on glyphosate. These studies all show a lack of genotoxicity.

Table 2 Genotoxicity Profile

Guideline No./ Study Type Results

Gene Mutation

870.5265 Non-mutagenic when tested up to 1000 ug/plate, in presence and

absence of activation in S . typhimurium strains TA98, TA100,

TA1535 and TA1537.

Gene Mutation

870.5300 Non-mutagenic at the HGPRT locus in Chinese hamster ovary cells tested up to cytotoxic concentra tions or limit of solubility, in presence and absence of activation.

In Vivo Cytogenetics -

Bone Marrow 870.5385 Non-mutagenic in rat bone marrow chromosome assay up to 1000 mg/kg in both sexes of Sprague Dawley rats.4

870.5550 Rec - Assay and Gene Mutation Assay There was no evidence of recombination in the rec-assay up to 2,000 ug/disk with B. subtilis H17 (rec+) and M45 (rec-). Negative for reverse gene mutation, both w ith and without S-9, up to 5,000 ug/plate (or cytotoxicity) with E.coli SP2hcrA and S. typhimuarium TA98, TA100, TA1535, TA1537, and TA1538.

]

3. Reproductive and developmental toxicity. [Developmental studies in rats and rabbits were conducted with glyphosate. In rabbits, a maternal NOAEL of 175 mg/kg/day was determined based on mortal ity, diarrhea, and nasal discharge at the LOAEL of 350 mg/kg/day. This was the lo west NOAEL of all major studies. The developmental NOAEL was 350 mg/kg/day (HDT).

In rats, developmental effects of unossi fied sternebrae and decreased fetal body weight were observed at a LOAEL of 3500 mg/kg/day (HDT) which was also the LOAEL for maternal toxicity. The ma ternal NOAEL was 1,000 mg/kg/day based on mortality, decreased body weight gain, inactivity, red matting on nose, mouth, forelimbs, and head, decrease in tota l implantations/dam and nonviable fetuses/dam. The developmental NOAEL in rats was 1000 mg/kg/day.

No reproductive effects were observed in the multigeneration study and in the 2- generation rat reproduction study, the offspring and parental NOAELs were 500 mg/kg/day based on decreased pup body weig ht during lactation (offspring) and soft stools, decreased body weight and food consumption (parents) at the LOAEL of 1500 mg/kg/day. The reproductive NOAEL was greater than or equal to 1500 mg/kg/day (HDT).

In developmental studies in rats and rabbits and reproductive findings in rates, developmental effects were only observed at maternally toxic doses. There was no evidence of any increased suscep tibility of the young to the effects of glyphosate in developmental and reproductive toxici ty studies in rats or rabbits.

A developmental neurotoxici ty study was not required.

Table 3 Reproductive and Deve lopmental Toxicity Profile

Guideline No./ Study Type Results

870.3700a Prenatal developmental in rodents (Rat) Maternal NOAEL = 1000 mg/kg/day LOAEL = 3500 mg/kg/day based on reduced activity, mortality, and reduced body weight gain.

Developmental NOAEL = 1000 mg/kg/day LOAEL = 3500 mg/kg/day based on increased incidence in the

number of fetuses and litters w ith unossified sternebrae and decreased fetal body weight.5

Table 3 Reproductive and Deve lopmental Toxicity Profile

Guideline No./ Study Type Results

870.3700b Prenatal developmental in (Rabbit) Materna l NOAEL = 175 mg/kg/day LOAEL = 350 mg/kg/day (HDT) base d on mortality, diarrhea, soft stools, and nasal discharge.

Developmenta l NOAEL = 350 mg/kg/day (HDT)

LOAEL = not established.

870.3800 Reproduction and fertility effects, 2-generation (Rat) Parental/Systemic NOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day in males and females LOAEL = 1500 mg/kg/day (HDT) in males and females based on soft stools, decreased body weight gain and food consumption.

Reproductive NOAEL ≥ 1500 mg/kg/day (HDT) in males and

females

Offspring NOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day (HDT) in males and females LOAEL = 1500 mg/kg/day in males and females based on decreased body weight ga in during lactation.

]

4. Subchronic toxicity. [In rodent feeding studies, glyphosate showed a NOAEL of 500 mg/kg/day in a 90-day mous e study and 1445 mg/kg/day (HDT) in a 90-day rat study. In a 21/28-day rabbit d ermal toxicity study the NOAEL was 1000 mg/kg/day and the LOAEL was 5000 mg/kg/ day based on slight erythema and

edema on intact and abraded skin of both sexes.

Table 4 Subchronic Toxicity Profile

Guideline No./ Study Type Results

870.3100 90-Day oral toxicity (Mouse) NOAEL = 500 mg/kg/day in males and females LOAEL = 2500 mg/kg/day (HDT) in males and females based on decreased body weight gains.

870.3100 90-Day oral toxicity (Rat) NOAEL = 1445 mg/kg/day (HDT)

LOAEL = not established

870.3200 21/28-Day dermal toxicity (Rabbit) NOAEL = 1000 mg/kg/day in males and females LOAEL = 5000 mg/kg/day based on slight erythema and edema on

intact and abraded skin of both sexes.

]

5. Chronic toxicity. [A chronic toxicity study in dogs showed no systemic effects found for all examined parameters in males and females at the highest dose tested, 500 mg/kg/day. Chronic feeding/carc inogenicity studies have been conducted6

in rodents with glyphosate and results show no evidence of carcinogenicity in mice or rats. In the mouse, a NOAEL of 750 mg/kg/day in males and females was established based on significant decreased body weight gain in both sexes and hepatocyte necrosis in males at the LO AEL of 4500 mg/kg/day. In the rat, a NOAEL of 362 mg/kg/day in males and 447 mg/kg/day in females based on decreased body weight gain in females and increased incidence of cataracts and lens

abnormalities in males at te LOAEL of 940 mg/kg/day in males and 1183 mg/kg/day in females. Glyphosate has been classified as “a Group E” carcinogen—no evidence of carcinogenicity to humans—based on th e absence of carcinogenicity in mice and

rats.

Table 5 Chronic Toxicity Profile

Guideline No./ Study Type Results

870.4100b Chronic toxicity (dog) NOAEL = > 500 mg/kg/day in males and females (HDT)

LOAEL = not established.

870.4300 Carcinogenicity (Mice) NOAEL = 750 mg/kg/day in males and females LOAEL = 4500 mg/kg/day in males and females based on significant decreased body weight gain in both sexes and hepatocyte necrosis in females. No evidence of carcinogenicity

870.4300

Chronic/Carcinogenicity (Rat) NOAEL = 362 mg/kg/day in males, 447 mg/kg/day in females LOAEL = 940 mg/kg/day in male s, 1183 mg/kg/day in females based on decreased body weight gain in females, increased

incidence of cataracts and lens abnormalities in males. No evidence of carcinogenicity

]

6. Animal metabolism. [In the rat metabolism study, absorption was estimated to be 30-36% in males and females. Glyphosate was excreted unchanged in the feces and urine (97.5% minimum). The only meta bolite present in the excreta was small

amounts of AMPA. Less than 1% of the ab sorbed dose remained in the carcass, primarily the bone. Repeated dosing di d not alter metabolism, distribution, and excretion.]

7. Metabolite toxicology

. [The residue of concern fo r risk assessment purposes is glyphosate per se . The metabolite AMPA is not included in either the tolerance expression or the risk assessment. In a meeting of the HED Metabolism Committee held 8/19/92, the Committee de termined that, based on toxicological considerations, AMPA need not be regulated and should be dropped from the tolerance expression (Memo, R. Perfetti, 10/10/92) . Furthermore, in a meeting of the HED Metabolism Committee held 3/17/94, the Committee disc ussed whether uses that result in significantly higher residues of AMPA in plants and livestock commodities in the future would require that AMPA be reintrodu ced into the tolerance expression of7

glyphosate. The Committee determined that , based on toxicological considerations, AMPA need not be regulated regardless of levels observed in foods or feeds (Memo, R. Perfetti, 3/17/94).]

8. Endocrine disruption

. [EPA is required under the FFDCA, as amended by FQPA, to develop a screening program to determine whether certain substances (including all pesticide acti ve and other ingredients) “may have an effect in humans that is similar to an effect produced by a naturally occurring es trogen, or other such

endocrine effects as the Administrator m ay designate.” Following recommendations of its Endocrine Disruptor and Test ing Advisory Committee (EDSTAC), EPA

determined that there was a scientific basi s for including, as part of the program, the androgen and thyroid hormone systems, in addition to the estrogen hormone system. EPA also adopted EDSTAC’s recommendation that the Program also include evaluations of potential effects in wildlife.

Glyphosate is on the EPA list of the init ial 67 pesticide active ingredients and pesticide inert high produc tion volume chemicals to be screened under the first phase of EPA’s Endocrine Disruption Screenin g Program (EDSP). This is not a list of “endocrine disruptors” or “potential endo crine disruptors;” it is simply a list of chemicals to be the first to go through EPA’ s evaluation process. The process that EPA used to prioritize substances for sc reening did not include a determination of potential endocrine activity of any of th e substances, but rather the potential for exposure. Glyphosate, a widely-used herbicide with multiple uses, was included on this list of initial active ingredients to be tested because it met the exposure criteria. Test orders are expected to be issu ed for glyphosate in January of 2010.

Glyphosate has undergone extensive testin g, including a battery of acute, subchronic, and chronic tests, and a number of developmental and reproductive studies, mammalian and wildlife, capable of detecting effects on endocrine mediated events. The results from these studies, along with other scie ntifically relevant information, provide reliable and functiona lly equivalent information to the Tier 1 screening assays and demonstrate that glyphosate is not an endocrine active

substance. ]

C. Aggregate Exposure [Aggregate exposure for glyphosate is the combination of chronic dietary exposure (food + drinking water) and short- and intermediate-term non-dietary oral exposure from residential (home lawn care) and recrea tional (golf, swimming) use exposure.]

1. Dietary exposure. [ Tolerances have been established (40CFR 180.364) for the residues of glyphosate N-(phosp honomethyl) glycine resulting from the application of glyphosate , the isopropylamine salt of glyphosate, the ethanolamine salt of glyphosate, th e dimethylamine salt of glyphosate, the ammonium salt of glyphosate, and the potassium salt of glyphosate in or on a variety of raw agricultural commodities, including meat and meat by-products. The dietary-exposure database is adequate to s upport the existing registrations. Chronic dietary risk assessments incorporate co ncentration estimates from the direct8

application of glyphosate to water, which represents a worst-case scenario, as the drinking water componen t of the assessment.

The petitioner proposes to establish a tolerance for corn, sweet, forage at 9 ppm and

to increase the tolerance fo r corn, sweet, kernels plus cob with husks removed from the present level of 0.1 ppm to 3.0 ppm. Th e proposed tolerance revision is not expected to increase the dietary burden fo r livestock; the existing tolerances for livestock commodities are sufficient.]

i. Food. [No toxicological endpoint attributable to a single does of glyphosate has been identified; therefore, a quantitat ive acute dietary exposure assessment is
not necessary.

A dietary risk assessment was conducted by Monsanto using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software (DEEM-FCIDTM), Version 2.16, which incorporates food consumption data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1994- 1996 and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII). A conservative estimate of diet ary exposure (Tier 1) was performed with the assumptions that 100% of crops with approved and proposed uses of glyphosate would be treated and that glyphosate residues would be present in each raw agricultural commodity at the toleran ce level. Under these conservative assumptions and based on a chronic po pulation adjusted dose (cPAD) for glyphosate of 1.75 mg/kg/day, the chronic di etary exposure estimates to glyphosate from food and drinking water is 5% of the cPAD for the general U.S. population. The chronic dietary exposure estimate for the most highly exposed subpopulation (children 1-2 years old) is 12% of the cPAD.

Glyphosate is classified as a not likely human carcinogen, so a cancer dietary exposure analysis was not performed.]

ii. Drinking water. [The Agency lacks sufficient monitoring exposure data to complete a comprehensive dietary expo sure analysis and risk assessment for glyphosate in drinking water. Because the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data, drinking water concentr ation estimates are made by reliance on simulation or modeling taking into account data on the physical characteristics of glyphosate. Further information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure asse ssment can be found at

h ttp://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/index.htm.

Glyphosate is registered for aquatic use to control weeds in bodies of water. Therefore, the Agency estimated the concen tration in surface water resulting from direct application of the maximum sing le application rate of 3.75 pounds of glyphosate free acid per acre to a water bo dy 6 feet deep. Based on this maximum application rate, the estimated concentration for use in the drinking water

assessment is 230 μ g/L (ppb). This estimate is based on a dilution model that does not take into account degradation in the wa ter body and partitioning into the water9

column-sediment phases.

Based on the generic expected enviro nmental concentration (GENEEC) and screening concentration in groundwater (SCI-GROW) models, the estimated environmental concentrations (EEC’s) of glyphosate for acute exposures are estimated to be 21 ppb for surface wa ter and 0.0038 ppb for ground water. The EEC’s for chronic exposures are estimate d to be 0.83 ppb for surface water and 0.0038 ppb for ground water, based on glyphosate treatment in crops.]

2. Non-dietary exposure

. [Glyphosate is registered for broadcast and spot treatments on home lawns and gardens, including for turf renovation. Glyphosate products for homeowner use are packaged as ready-to-mix formulations and readyto-use sprayers and are very common in home and garden stores in the U.S. Glyphosate products are also used by lawn care operators (LCOs) for broadcast and spot treatment weed control programs on homeowner lawns. Glyphosate products are also registered for weed control in rec reational areas, including parks and golf courses, and for control of aquatic weed s in lakes, ponds and reservoirs. All recreational and residential exposures assess ed do not exceed the Agency’s level of concern (MOEs <100).

The term “residential exposure,” as used here, refers to non-occupational nondietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden weed control). A risk assessment was conducted using the following residential exposure assumptions: Based on the registered residential use patterns, there is a potential for short-term dermal and inhalation exposures to homeowners who apply products containing glyphosate (residential handlers). Addi tionally, based on the resul ts of environmental fate studies, there is also a potential for sh ort- and intermediate-term post-application dermal exposures by adults and toddlers and incidental ingestion exposures by toddlers. However, since short- and intermediate-term dermal and inhalation endpoints were not identified, no residen tial handler or post-application dermal assessment is required. Post-application to ddler assessment for incidental ingestion exposures was performed; risk estimate s ranged from 7,230 to greater than 10 6

.

Based on the registered uses of glyphosate in recreational areas and for aquatic weed control, adult and child golfers a re anticipated to have short-term, postapplication dermal exposure at golf courses and swimmers (adults, children and toddlers) are anticipated to have short-term post-application dermal and incidental ingestion exposures. However, since HIARC did not select dermal endpoints, no post-application dermal assessment is necessary. Post-application incidental ingestion exposure assessment was perfor med for adult, children and toddler swimmers; risk estimate s ranged from 7,610 to 35,500.

Spray drift is always a potential source of exposure to residents nearby to spraying operations, particularly with aerial applicat ion, but, to a lesser extent, could also be a potential source of exposure from the ground application method employed for glyphosate. The Agency has been workin g with the Spray Drift Task Force, EPA10

Regional Offices and State Lead Agencies for pesticide regulati on and other parties to develop the best spray drift management practices. ]

D. Cumulative Effects [ Unlike other pesticides for which EPA ha s followed a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to gl yphosate and any other substances, and glyphosate does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this to lerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that glyphosate has 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 the final rule for Bife nthrin Pesticide Tolerances (62 FR 62961, November 26, 1997). ]

E. Safety Determination

1. U.S. population. [A chronic dietary risk as sessment of glyphosate was conducted using the current and the proposed new and increased tolerances for sweet corn. The Tier 1 chronic dietary analysis for glyphosate is a conservative estimate of dietary exposure that uses tolerance level res idues and 100% crop treated. Under this assumption, exposure to glyphosate from food and water will utilize only 5% of the chronic population ad justed dose (cPAD) for the general U.S. population. Based on its use pattern, chronic residential and recreational exposure to residues of glyphosate is not expected.

Based on the completeness and reliability of the toxicity data and the conservative exposure assessment, it can be concluded that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general U.S. po pulation from chronic aggregate exposure to glyphosate residues.]

2. Infants and children

. [FFCDA Section 408 provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold margin of safety for in fants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postna tal toxicity and the completeness of the

database. EPA has previously evaluated the prenatal and postnatal sensitivity of glyphosate and the adequacy of the data base as indicated in the Reregistration Eligilibility Decisi on for glyphosate

. There is no evidence of increased susceptibility

in rats and rabbits to in utero and/or postnatal exposure to glyphosate. EPA has concluded that there is a complete toxicity data base for glyphosate and exposure data are complete or are estimated based on data that reasonably accounts for all potential exposures. EPA determined that th e 10X safety factor to protect infants and children is not necessary as well as the FQPA. The use of generally high quality data, conservative models and/or assumptions in the exposure assessment, provide adequate protection of infants and children

.

Chronic dietary exposure to residues of current and proposed new and increased11

tolerances for sweet corn is estimated to utilize only 12% of the chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD) for children 1-2 ye ars old, which is the population subgroup predicted to be most highly exposed.

Use of glyphosate on turf does presen t a potential short- and intermediate-term exposure for children 1-2 years old. The aggregate MOE for the total short- and

intermediate-term food and residential aggregate exposure a re greater than 100, and, therefore, does not exceed the Agency’s level of concern.

Based on the completeness and reliability of the toxicity data and the conservative exposure assessment, it can be concluded that there is a reasonable certainty that no

harm will result to infants and children from chronic, short- and intermediate-term aggregate exposure to glyphosate residues.]

F. International Tolerances

[The U.S., Mexico, and Codex residue definitions are established and harmonized for residues of glyphosate per se , whereas there are discrepancies with

the Canadian residue definition which incl udes the combined residues of glyphosate and it major metabolite, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA). Canada, Mexico

and Codex have established MRLs for res idues of glyphosate in/on several raw agricultural and livestock commodities, but several MRLs are not harmonized with

U.S. tolerances. Current U.S. toleran ce for corn, sweet, grain is 0.1 ppm and the Canadian MRL is currently 3 ppm. This petition seeks to harmonize the U.S. tolerance with the MRL for this agricultur al commodity in Canada. Codex does not maintain a specific MRL for sweet corn (cor n-on-the-cob or kernel s) and the EU has an MRL of 0.1 mg/kg set at the lower limit of analytical determination for the commodity sweet corn.]