38204 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

using the Agency’s Tolerance 

Spreadsheet in accordance with the 

Agency’s Guidance for Setting Pesticide 

Tolerances Based on Field Trial Data. 

V. Conclusion 

Therefore, tolerances are established 

for residues of propiconazole, (1-[[2- 

(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-propyl-1,3- 

dioxolan-2-yl] methyl]-1H–1,2,4- 

triazole) and its metabolites determined 

as 2,4-dichlorobenzoic acid and 

expressed as parent compound, in or on 

bean, snap at 0.70 ppm; bean, succulent 

shelled at 0.10 ppm; vegetable, foliage of 

legume, group 7 at 30 ppm; bean, dry 

seed at 0.40 ppm; tomato at 3.0 ppm; 

fruit, citrus, group 10–10 at 8.0 ppm; 

fruit, stone, group 12, except plum at 4.0 

ppm; plum at 0.60 ppm; and citrus, oil 

at 1000 ppm. Additionally, the 

established tolerance is removed for 

fruit, stone, group 12 at 1.0 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) (Pub. L. 104–4). 

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), Public Law 104–113, section 

12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). 

VII. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. 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 this final rule in the 

Federal Register. This final rule 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: June 8, 2012. 

Lois Rossi, 

Director, Registration Division. 

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. 321(q), 346a and 371. 

■ 2. In § 180.434, the table in paragraph 

(a) is amended as follows: 

■ i. Remove the entry ‘‘fruit, stone, 

group 12’’ and 

■ ii. Add, alphabetically, the following 

commodities to read as follows: 

§ 180.434 Propiconazole; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Bean, dry seed ........................... 0.40 

Bean, snap ................................. 0.70 

Bean, succulent shelled ............. 0.10 

* * * * * 

Citrus, oil ..................................... 1000 

* * * * * 

Fruit, citrus, group 10–10 ........... 8.0 

Fruit, stone, group 12, except 

plum ........................................ 4.0 

* * * * * 

Plum ............................................ 0.60 

* * * * * 

Tomato ........................................ 3.0 

* * * * * 

Vegetable, foliage of legume, 

group 7 .................................... 30 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–15539 Filed 6–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0029; FRL–9352–5] 

Cyflufenamid; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes 

tolerances for residues of cyflufenamid 

in or on multiple commodities which 

are identified and discussed later in this 

document. Nippon Soda Co., Ltd., c/o 

Nisso America, Inc. requested these 

tolerances under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective June 

27, 2012. Objections and requests for 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 38205 

hearings must be received on or before 

August 27, 2012, 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–2009–0029; 

FRL–9352–5, is available either 

electronically through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the OPP Docket in the Environmental 

Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ 

DC), located in EPA West, 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: 

Samantha Hulkower, Registration 

Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (703) 603–0683; email address: 

hulkower.samantha@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. Potentially 

affected entities may include, but are 

not limited to those engaged in the 

following activities: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this unit could also 

be affected. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes have been provided to 

assist you and others in determining 

whether this action might apply to 

certain entities. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

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://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/ 

text/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–2009–0029 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 August 27, 2012. 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 that does not 

contain 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 a copy of 

your non-CBI objection or hearing 

request, identified by docket ID number 

EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0029, 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 CBI or 

other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ 

DC), Mail Code: 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 April 8, 

2009 (74 FR 15971) (FRL–8407–4), EPA 

issued a notice pursuant to section 

408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 

346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a 

pesticide petition (PP 8F7488) by 

Nippon Soda Co., Ltd., 

c/o Nisso America, Inc., 45 Broadway, 

Suite 2120, New York, NY 10006. The 

petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 

be amended by establishing tolerances 

for residues of the fungicide 

cyflufenamid, in or on cucurbit 

vegetables (crop group 9) at 0.05 parts 

per million (ppm); pome fruit (crop 

group 11), 0.05 ppm; apple, wet 

pomace, at 0.10 ppm; small fruit vine 

climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit 

(subgroup 13–07F) at 0.15 ppm; grape, 

raisin, at 0.30 ppm, and low growing 

berry (subgroup 13–07G), except 

cranberry, at 0.20 ppm. That notice 

referenced a summary of the petition 

prepared by Nippon Soda Co., Ltd., 

c/o Nisso America, Inc, the registrant, 

which is available in the docket, at 

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 has 

slightly increased the tolerances for 

pome fruit (Crop Group 11), 0.05 ppm 

to 0.06 ppm, and cucurbits (Crop Group 

9), 0.05 to 0.07 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. * * *’’ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
38206 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

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 cyflufenamid 

including exposure resulting from the 

tolerances established by this action. 

EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks 

associated with cyflufenamid 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. Cyflufenamid has 

low acute toxicity via the oral, dermal 

and inhalation routes of exposure. 

Though slightly irritating to the eye, 

cyflufenamid is not a skin irritant or 

sensitizer. In the mammalian toxicology 

database, the liver was the primary 

target organ for cyflufenamid toxicity. 

Across species, duration and gender, 

changes in weight, clinical chemistry 

and pathology indicated treatmentrelated perturbations in and adverse 

effects on liver function. 

Thyroid effects due to treatment with 

cyflufenamid, seen only in the rat, 

included increased follicular cell 

hypertrophy (as well as increased organ 

weight) and neoplastic thyroid follicular 

adenomas. Kidney effects related to 

treatment included increased kidney 

weight accompanied by tubular 

vacuolation and slight decreases in 

sodium and chloride concentrations. 

Treatment-related cardiotoxicity was 

noted in the rat and mouse feeding 

studies. Observed myocardial 

vacuolation and lipidosis may be 

attributed to decreased lipid 

metabolism; cyflufenamid caused an 

approximately 50% inhibition of 

carnitine palmitoyltransferase in both 

rat and mouse heart microsomal 

fractions in a non-guideline mechanistic 

study. Carnitine palmitoyltransferase is 

involved in the transport of long chain 

fatty acids into the mitochondrial matrix 

for oxidation. Fatty acid oxidation is an 

important source of energy for ATP 

production in the mitochondria. 

Cyflufenamid-induced brain 

vacuolation was specific to the dog and 

not associated with any apparent 

clinical sign of neurotoxicity. 

Supplementary studies investigating 

this phenomenon determined that 

vacuolation was due to myelin edema 

affecting the white matter of the 

cerebrum and thalamus. Furthermore, 

this brain lesion was partially reversed 

after a 13-week recovery period 

(following 90-day exposure) and fully 

reversed after a 26-week recovery 

period. This effect was not observed in 

any other species. A subchronic 

neurotoxicity study in rats showed no 

evidence of neurotoxicity. 

Effects on reproductive organs and/or 

parameters were noted in several 

subchronic studies at doses greater than 

the respective Lowest Observed Adverse 

Effect Level (LOAELs). Decreased uterus 

and cervix weights, adrenal cortical 

hypertrophy and reduced quality and 

quantity of spermatozoa were observed 

in dogs. Leydig cell hypertrophy was 

observed in rats and mice. It is unclear 

what toxicological significance should 

be ascribed to these findings since they 

may be secondary to systemic toxicity or 

hepatic enzyme induction. Mating 

performance and fertility in the P/F0

generation were both unaffected by 

treatment with cyflufenamid in the 2- 

generation reproductive toxicity study 

in rats. Sex ratio, sexual maturation, 

estrous cyclicity, sperm quantity and 

quality, mating performance and 

fertility, gestation and viability indices 

in the F1 generation were all unaffected 

by treatment. 

Cyflufenamid is classified as ‘‘likely 

to be carcinogenic to humans.’’ This was 

based on the presence of two tumor 

types in two species: Thyroid follicular 

cell tumors in male rats and liver 

tumors in male mice. There is no 

concern for mutagenicity or 

clastogenicity. The unit risk, Q1*, of 

cyflufenamid based upon male mouse 

liver combined adenoma and carcinoma 

tumor rates is 6.61 × 10¥3 (mg/kg/ 

day)¥1 in human equivalents. 

Specific information on the studies 

received and the nature of the adverse 

effects caused by cyflufenamid as well 

as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level 

(NOAEL) and the lowest-observedadverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the 

toxicity studies can be found at http:// 

www.regulations.gov in document 

‘‘Human Health Risk Assessment,’’ 

docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2009– 

0029. 

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 cyflufenamid used for 

human risk assessment is shown in 

Table 1 below. No hazards were 

identified for acute dietary across all 

populations. For dermal short and 

intermediate term exposures no adverse 

effects were observed in the dermal 

toxicity study and there are no concerns 

for developmental or neurological 

toxicities, therefore no hazards are 

expected for these exposure scenarios. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 38207 

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR CYFLUFENAMID FOR USE IN HUMAN HEALTH RISK

ASSESSMENT

Exposure/scenario 

Point of departure 

and uncertainty/ 

safety factors 

RfD, PAD, LOC for 

risk assessment Study and toxicological effects 

Chronic dietary (All populations) ............ NOAEL= 4.4 mg/ 

kg/day.

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

FQPA SF = 1x 

cRfD = 0.044 mg/ 

kg/day.

cPAD = 0.044 mg/ 

kg/day. 

Combined Chronic Toxicity/Carcinogenicity Study in Rats 

LOAEL = 22 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight 

gain; increased thyroid/parathyroid weight, increased 

liver weight and centrilobular hepatocytic hypertrophy. 

Incidental oral short-term (1 to 30 days) 

and intermediate-term (1 to 6 months).

NOAEL= 5 mg/kg/ 

day.

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

FQPA SF = 1x 

LOC for MOE = 

100.

Prenatal Developmental Study in Rabbits Maternal 

LOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight, 

body weight gain and food consumption. 

Inhalation short-term (1 to 30 days) and 

intermediate-term (1 to 6 months).

NOAEL= 5 mg/kg/ 

day.

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

FQPA SF = 1x 

LOC for MOE = 

100.

Prenatal Developmental Study in Rabbits Maternal 

LOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight, 

body weight gain and food consumption. 

Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation) ........... Likely to be carcinogenic to humans. Quantification of cancer risk was recommended. The Q1* value 

is 6.61 × 10¥3 (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 (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 cyflufenamid, EPA 

considered exposure under the 

petitioned-for tolerances. EPA assessed 

dietary exposures from cyflufenamid 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 cyflufenamid; 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 United States Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) 1994–1996 and 

1998 Continuing Survey of Food Intake 

by Individuals (CSFII). As to residue 

levels in food, this dietary assessment 

was based on average field trial residues 

for all proposed crops and 100% crop 

treated (CT). Empirical processing 

factors were used for apple juice and 

grape juice. A separate tolerance was set 

for grape, raisin; therefore, the 

processing factor for this commodity 

was set at 1. For all other processed 

commodities, Dietary Exposure 

Evaluation Model (DEEM) version 7.81 

default processing factors were 

assumed. 

iii. Cancer. Cancer risk was assessed 

using the same exposure estimates as 

discussed in Unit III.C.1.ii., chronic 

exposure. 

iv. Anticipated residue and percent 

crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did 

not use PCT information in the dietary 

assessment for cyflufenamid. Onehundred PCT were assumed for all food 

commodities. 

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. 

2. Dietary exposure from drinking 

water. The Agency used screening level 

water exposure models in the dietary 

exposure analysis and risk assessment 

for cyflufenamid in drinking water. 

These simulation models take into 

account data on the physical, chemical, 

and fate/transport characteristics of 

cyflufenamid. 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 

cyflufenamid for acute exposures are 

estimated to be 1.14 parts per billion 

(ppb) for surface water and 4.68 ppb for 

ground water. Chronic exposures for 

non-cancer assessments are estimated to 

be 0.03 ppb for surface water and 4.68 

ppb for ground water. Chronic 

exposures for cancer assessments are 

estimated to be 0.01 ppb for surface 

water and 4.68 ppb for ground water. 

Modeled estimates of drinking water 

concentrations were directly entered 

into the dietary exposure model. 

For acute dietary risk assessment, no 

toxic effects attributable to a single 

exposure to cyflufenamid have been 

identified; therefore, an acute reference 

dose (aRfD) has not been established 

and an acute dietary exposure 

assessment was not conducted. 

For chronic and cancer dietary risk 

assessments, the ground water 

concentration value of 4.68 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 nonoccupational, non-dietary exposure 

(e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
38208 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

indoor pest control, termiticides, and 

flea and tick control on pets). 

Cyflufenamid is proposed to be 

registered for the following uses that 

could result in residential exposures: 

Mixing, loading, and applying a soluble 

concentrate formulation of cyflufenamid 

for treatment of ornamental plantings 

and trees. EPA assessed residential 

exposure using the following 

assumptions: Based on the use patterns, 

residential handlers could be exposed to 

cyflufenamid on a short-term basis. A 

short-term dermal endpoint was not 

identified; therefore, only short-term 

non-cancer inhalation risks and cancer 

risks for residential handlers were 

assessed. 

When determining the potential for 

residential post-application exposure, 

the Agency considers foliar residues, 

leaf to skin/hand residue transfer, 

children’s hand-to-mouth residue 

transfer, and exposure time. In the case 

of cyflufenamid, potential exposure to 

adults and children would be negligible 

for the following reasons: 

• Activities such as pruning/thinning 

ornamentals or playing in and around 

ornamentals when residues may be 

present on the day of the application are 

unlikely to co-occur; 

• If present, leaf to skin residue 

transfer would be negligible because of 

the minimal frequency and duration of 

contact; 

• Children young enough to exhibit 

hand-to-mouth behavior would not 

typically play in ornamental beds or 

trees. 

Based on the frequency of application 

and unlikely potential for postapplication exposure, residential postapplication risks were not quantitatively 

assessed; thus, there are no 

postapplication residential risk 

concerns for this use pattern. 

Further information regarding EPA 

standard assumptions and generic 

inputs for residential exposures may be 

found at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/ 

trac/science/trac6a05.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 cyflufenamid to share a common 

mechanism of toxicity with any other 

substances, and cyflufenamid does not 

appear to produce a toxic metabolite 

produced by other substances. For the 

purposes of this tolerance action, 

therefore, EPA has assumed that 

cyflufenamid 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 susceptibility 

following in utero and/or postnatal 

exposure in the developmental toxicity 

studies in rats or rabbits, and in the 2- 

generation rat reproduction study. There 

are no residual uncertainties concerning 

pre- and postnatal toxicity and no 

neurotoxicity concerns. 

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 

cyflufenamid is complete, with the 

exception of an acute neurotoxicity 

study (ACN, OPPTS 870.6200a). The 

absence of this study does not raise any 

uncertainties with regard to the safety of 

infants and children for the following 

reasons. First, no acute affects have been 

attributed to cyflufenamid. In an acute 

oral toxicity study, adverse effects were 

noted on the day of administration 

(limit dose) but not thereafter; clinical 

signs of piloerection, hunched posture, 

unsteady gait, pallid extremities, 

increased salivation, ungroomed 

appearance and abnormal respiration 

were observed in the majority of 

animals receiving 5,000 mg/kg and 

generally resolved by Day 2 of the study. 

Second, an acceptable, guideline 

subchronic neurotoxicity study is 

available and in it repeat exposure to 

doses up to approximately 500 mg/kg/ 

day did not elicit any neurotoxic effects 

as assessed in the functional 

observational battery, motor activity, 

neurohistopathology or brain 

morphometrics. Third, cyflufenamid is 

not an apparently neurotoxic chemical 

based on clinical toxicity assessments 

incorporated within the developmental 

and chronic rat studies. In several shortterm studies in rats (subacute and 

subchronic feeding, plaque-forming cell 

assay, one-generation pilot, 

developmental toxicity), no 

neurobehavioral signs were observed at 

the highest doses tested. While the 

relevant and reversible effect of brain 

vacuolation was observed in the 

subchronic dog study at approximately 

70 mg/kg/day, it is observed in the 

absence of overt neurotoxicity and 

nowhere else in the toxicology database. 

Finally, based on this information, an 

acute neurotoxicity screening test is 

very unlikely to yield a point of 

departure less than the chronic NOAEL 

of 4.4 mg/kg/day if any adverse effects 

are observed at all. Even if the chronic 

point of departure was used in assessing 

acute risk, there would be no risk 

concern based on acute dietary 

exposure. 

ii. There is no indication that 

cyflufenamid 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 

cyflufenamid 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 chronic dietary assessment 

assumed 100% crop treated for all 

commodities and utilized average field 

trial residues for all proposed crops, 

default and empirical processing factors. 

EPA made conservative (protective) 

assumptions in the ground and surface 

water modeling used to assess exposure 

to cyflufenamid in drinking water. EPA 

used similarly conservative assumptions 

to assess postapplication exposure of 

children as well as incidental oral 

exposure of toddlers. These assessments 

will not underestimate the exposure and 

risks posed by cyflufenamid. 

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 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 38209 

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, cyflufenamid 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 cyflufenamid 

from food and water will utilize 1% of 

the cPAD for all infants (<1 year old) the 

population group receiving the greatest 

exposure. 

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). Because no short-term 

adverse effect was identified, 

cyflufenamid is not expected to pose a 

short-term risk. 

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). 

Because no intermediate-term adverse 

effect was identified, cyflufenamid is 

not expected to pose a intermediateterm risk. 

5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. 

population. Aggregate cancer exposure 

takes into account residential handler 

exposure, plus chronic exposure to food 

and water (considered to be a 

background exposure level). The 

aggregate cancer risk (food, water, and 

residential) is 9.7 × 10¥7. 

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 cyflufenamid 

residues. 

IV. Other Considerations 

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

Adequate multiresidue methods test 

data for cyflufenamid were submitted. 

Acceptable recoveries of cyflufenamid 

from a non-fatty matrix (grape) were 

achieved under Protocol E. Acceptable 

recoveries from a fatty matrix (milk) 

were also achieved under Protocol F. 

EPA recommends that Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) multiresidue 

methods be used as the primary 

enforcement method. The submitted 

data will be forwarded to the FDA for 

further evaluation. 

Adequate enforcement methodologies 

are available to enforce the tolerance 

expression. The LC/MS/MS method 

(Method 070276) was submitted for the 

determination of cyflufenamid residues 

in/on pome fruit, cucurbit vegetables, 

grapes, and strawberries. The proposed 

enforcement method (Method 070276) 

which monitors only one transition ion, 

in combination with the FDA 

multiresidue method meets the OPPTS 

Residue Chemistry Test Guidelines for 

acceptable tolerance enforcement 

methods (SOP Number ACB–019). An 

enforcement method for livestock 

commodities is not needed because 

tolerances for cyflufenamid residues of 

concern in meat, milk, poultry, and eggs 

are not required to support the proposed 

uses based on the results of the goat 

metabolism study and the calculated 

dietary burden. 

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 cyflufenamid. 

Cyflufenamid is not registered in 

Canada. 

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For 

Tolerances 

The EPA increased the proposed 

tolerance for pome fruit crop group 11 

from 0.05 ppm to 0.06 ppm and for 

cucurbit crop group 9 from 0.05 ppm to 

0.07 ppm. These changes were made by 

EPA based on North American Free 

Trade Agreement (NAFTA) tolerance 

calculation procedures according to the 

Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) 

Guidance for Setting Pesticide 

Tolerances Based on Field Trial Data. 

V. Conclusion 

Therefore, tolerances are established 

for residues of cyflufenamid, in or on 

Apple, wet pomace, 0.10 ppm; Berry, 

low growing, subgroup 13–07G, except 

cranberry, 0.20 ppm; Fruit, pome, group 

11, 0.06 ppm; Fruit, small vine 

climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, 

subgroup 13–07F, 0.15 ppm; Grape, 

raisin, 0.30 ppm; Vegetable, cucurbit, 

group 9, 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, 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
38210 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

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) (Pub. L. 104–4). 

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), Public Law 104–113, section 

12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). 

VII. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. 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 this final rule in the 

Federal Register. This final rule 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: June 15, 2012. 

Steven Bradbury, 

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. 321(q), 346a and 371. 

■ 2. Section 180.667 is added to subpart 

C to read as follows: 

§ 180.667 Cyflufenamid, tolerance for 

residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of the fungicide 

cyflufenamid, including its metabolites 

and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table below. 

Compliance with the tolerance levels 

specified below is to be determined by 

measuring only cyflufenamid, [N(Z)]-N- 

[[(cyclopropylmethoxy)amino][2,3- 

difluoro-6-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]

methylene]benzeneacetamide. 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Apple, wet pomace ..................... 0.10 

Berry, low growing, subgroup 

13–07G, except cranberry ...... 0.20 

Fruit, pome, group 11 ................. 0.06 

Fruit, small vine climbing, except 

fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13– 

07F .......................................... 0.15 

Grape, raisin ............................... 0.30 

Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 ...... 0.07 

(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. 

[Reserved] 

(c) Tolerances with regional 

registrations. [Reserved] 

(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. 

[Reserved] 

[FR Doc. 2012–15595 Filed 6–26–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 90 

[WT Docket No. 11–110; WT Docket No. 12– 

64; FCC 12–55] 

Channel Spacing and Bandwidth 

Limitations for Certain Economic Area 

(EA)-Based 800 MHz Specialized 

Mobile Radio Licensees 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; announcement of 

effective date. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission (FCC) 

announces that the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved, for a period of three years, the 

information collection associated with 

the Commission’s rules to permit 

Economic Area (EA)-based 800 MHz 

Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) 

licensees to exceed a legacy channel 

spacing requirement and bandwidth 

limitation. 

DATES: Section 90.209(b)(7) will become 

effective July 9, 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Regan, Mobility Division, 

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, 

at (202) 418–2849, or email: 

brian.regan@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document announces that on May 16, 

2012 OMB approved, for a period of 

three years, the information collection 

requirements contained in the 

Commission’s Report and Order, FCC 

12–55. The OMB Control Number is 

3060–1170. The Commission publishes 

this notice as an announcement of such 

approval. Because the information 

collection was pre-approved prior to the 

adoption or publication of the final rule, 

the effective date of this information 

collection is 30 days after the final rule 

under FCC 12–55 is published in the 

Federal Register. If you have any 

comments on the burden estimates 

listed below, or how the Commission 

can improve the collections and reduce 

any burdens caused thereby, please 

contact Cathy Williams, Federal 

Communications Commission, Room 1– 

C823, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, 

DC 20554. Please include the OMB 

Control Number, 3060–1170, in your 

correspondence. The Commission will 

also accept your comments via email at 

PRA@fcc.gov. 

To request materials in accessible 

formats for people with disabilities 

(Braille, large print, electronic files, 

audio format), send an email to 

fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer 

and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 

(202) 418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 

(TTY). 

Synopsis 

As required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), 

the FCC is notifying the public that on 

May 16, 2012 it received OMB preapproval for the information collection 

requirements contained in the 

modifications to the Commission’s rules 

found in 47 CFR 90.209(b)(7). 

Under 5 CFR part 1320, an agency 

may not conduct or sponsor a collection 

of information unless it displays a 

current, valid OMB Control Number. 

No person shall be subject to any 

penalty for failing to comply with a 

collection of information subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act that does not 

display a current, valid OMB Control 

Number. The OMB Control Number is 

3060–1170. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES