69642 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 9, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

Inert ingredients Limits Uses 

*******

Amides, C5-C9, N-[3-(dimethylamino) propyl]; CAS Reg. No. 1044764–00–2 ..................................................... ........................ Surfactant 

Amides, C6-C12, N-[3-(dimethylamino) propyl]; CAS Reg. No. 1044764–06–8 ................................................... ........................ Surfactant 

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–28643 Filed 11–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0876; FRL–9325–6] 

Flutriafol; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes 

tolerances for residues of flutriafol, ((±)- 

a-(2-fluorophenyl)-a-(4-fluorophenyl)- 

1H-1,2,4-triazole-1-ethanol, in or on 

multiple commodities which are 

identified and discussed later in this 

document. Cheminova A/S, c/o 

Cheminova, Inc. requested these 

tolerances under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

November 9, 2011. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before January 9, 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: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under docket 

identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2010–0876. All documents in the 

docket are listed in the docket index 

available at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available in the electronic docket at 

http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the OPP 

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– 

4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 

2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The 

Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. 

to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The Docket 

Facility telephone number is (703) 305– 

5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tamue L. Gibson, Registration Division 

(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 305–9096; email address: 

gibson.tamue@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–2010]–0876 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 January 9, 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 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–2010–0876, by one of 

the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. 

• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public 

Docket (7502P), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket 

Facility’s normal hours of operation 

(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Docket Facility telephone number is 

(703) 305–5805. 

II. Summary of Petitioned-For 

Tolerance 

In the Federal Register of December 

15, 2010 (75 FR 78241) (FRL–8853–1), 

EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 

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

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


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 9, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 69643 

pesticide petitions (PP 0E7772, 0F7770, 

0F7771) by Cheminova A/S, c/o 

Cheminova, Inc. 1600 Wilson Blvd., 

Arlington, VA 22209. The petitions 

requested that 40 CFR part 180 be 

amended by establishing tolerances for 

residues of the fungicide flutriafol, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on banana, whole 

(import tolerance) at 0.50 parts per 

million (ppm) (PP 0E7772). Corn, field, 

forage at 4.0 ppm; corn, field, stover at 

6.0 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.01 ppm; 

corn, field, flour at 0.03 ppm; corn, 

field, oil at 0.07 ppm; corn, field, meal 

at 0.03 ppm; corn, pop, stover at 6.0 

ppm; corn, pop, grain at 0.01 ppm; 

grape at 1.1 ppm; grape, raisin at 2.5 

ppm; peanut at 0.08 ppm; peanut, hay 

at 18 ppm; fruit, pome (Crop Group 11) 

at 0.60 ppm; fruit, stone (Crop Group 

12) at 0.80 ppm; beet, sugar, root at 1.5 

ppm; beet, sugar, tops at 2.5 ppm; beet, 

sugar, refined at 0.70 ppm; beet, sugar, 

molasses at 1.0 ppm; beet, sugar, dried 

pulp at 1.0 ppm; wheat, forage at 25 

ppm; wheat, hay at 9.0 ppm; wheat, 

straw at 6.0 ppm; wheat, grain at 0.15 

ppm; wheat, grain, bran at 0.20 ppm; 

wheat, grain, germ at 0.20 ppm; barley, 

hay at 9.0 ppm; barley, straw at 6.0 

ppm; barley, grain at 0.15 ppm; barley, 

grain, bran at 0.20 ppm; buckwheat, 

grain at 0.15 ppm; oats, forage at 25 

ppm; oats, hay at 9.0 ppm; oats, straw 

at 6.0 ppm; oats, grain at 0.15 ppm; oats, 

grain, bran at 0.20 ppm; rye, forage at 25 

ppm; rye, straw at 6.0 ppm; rye, grain 

at 0.15 ppm; cattle, liver at 0.12 ppm; 

goat, liver at 0.12 ppm; horse, liver at 

0.12 ppm; sheep, liver at 0.12 ppm; and 

milk at 0.02 ppm (PP 0F7771). The 

petition also requested that the 40 CFR 

part 180 be amended by establishing 

tolerances for the indirect or inadvertent 

residues of the fungicide flutriafol, 

including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on sweet corn, field 

corn and cotton raw agricultural 

commodities (corn, sweet, forage at 0.05 

ppm; corn, sweet, stover at 0.09 ppm; 

corn, sweet, kernels plus cob with husks 

removed at 0.01 ppm; corn, field, forage 

at 0.10 ppm; corn, field, stover at 0.07 

ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.01 ppm; 

cotton, undelinted seed at 0.01 ppm; 

and cotton, gin byproducts at 0.05 ppm) 

grown in fields previously planted with 

soybeans that were treated with 

flutriafol (PP 0F7770). That notice 

referenced a summary of the petitions 

prepared by Cheminova A/S, c/o 

Cheminova, 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 raised the 

requested tolerance levels for direct 

application to grape; peanut; fruit, 

stone, group 12–10; and rotational crop 

tolerances for corn, sweet, forage. EPA 

lowered tolerance levels for direct 

application to banana (import); grape, 

raisin; fruit, pome, group 11–09; beet, 

sugar; and rotational crop tolerances for 

corn, sweet, stover; corn, field, forage; 

and cotton, gin byproducts. EPA is not 

granting, at this time, tolerances for 

direct application to beet, sugar, top; 

peanut, hay; beet, sugar, refined; beet, 

sugar, molasses; beet, sugar, dried pulp; 

milk; corn, field, forage; corn, field, 

stover; corn, field, grain; corn, field, 

flour; corn, field, refined oil; corn, field, 

meal; corn, pop; corn, pop, stover; 

wheat, forage; wheat, hay; wheat, straw; 

wheat, grain; wheat, bran; wheat, germ; 

triticale, grain; barley, hay; barley, 

straw; barley, grain; barley, grain, bran; 

buckwheat, grain; oat, forage; oat, hay; 

oat, straw; oat, grain; oat, grain, bran; 

rye, forage; rye, straw; and rye, grain. 

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 section 408(b)(2)(D) 

of FFDCA, and the factors specified in 

section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, 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 flutriafol 

including exposure resulting from the 

tolerances established by this action. 

EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks 

associated with flutriafol 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. 

Flutriafol has high oral acute toxicity 

in the mouse. It has low acute toxicity 

via the oral, dermal and inhalation 

routes in rats. Flutriafol is minimally 

irritating to the eyes and is not a dermal 

irritant. Flutriafol was not shown to be 

a skin sensitizer when tested in guinea 

pigs. 

Short-term, subchronic, and chronic 

toxicity studies in rats, mice, and dogs 

identified the liver as the primary target 

organ of flutriafol. Hepatotoxicity was 

first evident in the subchronic studies 

(rats and dogs) in the form of increases 

in liver enzyme release (alkaline 

phosphatase), liver weights, and 

histopathology findings ranging from 

hepatocyte vacuolization to 

centrilobular hypertrophy and slight 

increases in hemosiderin-laden Kupffer 

cells. It is noteworthy that with chronic 

exposures, there are no indications of 

progression of liver toxicity in any of 

the species tested. After over 1 year of 

exposure, hepatotoxicity in rats, dogs, 

and mice took the form of: 

1. Minimal to severe fatty changes; 

2. Bile duct proliferation/ 

cholangiolarfibrosis; 

3. Hemosiderin accumulation in 

Kupffer cells; 

4. Centrilobular hypertrophy, and 

5. Increases in alkaline phosphatase 

release. 

Slight indications of effects in the 

hematopoietic system are sporadically 

seen in the database. These effects were 

manifested in the form of slight anemia 

(rats and dogs) and increased platelet, 

white blood cell, neutrophil, and 

lymphocyte counts (mice). These 

effects, however, were minimal in 

severity. 

Specific information on the studies 

received and the nature of the adverse 

effects caused by flutriafol 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 

‘‘Flutriafol: Human Health Risk 

Assessment for Proposed Uses on Corn, 

Grapes, Peanuts, Pome Fruit (Crop 

Group 11), Stone Fruit (Crop Group 12), 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
69644 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 9, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

Sugar Beets, Wheat, Barley, Triticale, 

Buckwheat, Oats, Rye, Teosinte and 

Imported Bananas’’ at page 40 in docket 

ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0876. 

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 flutriafol used for human 

risk assessment is shown in the 

following Table. 

TABLE—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR FLUTRIAFOL 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 

Acute dietary (Females 13– 

49 years of age).

NOAEL = 7.5 mg/kg/day) ..

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

FQPA SF = 1x 

Acute RfD = 0.075 mg/kg/ 

day.

aPAD = 0.075mg/kg/day 

FQPA SF = 1x 

Developmental study-rabbit LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day 

based on decreased number of live fetuses, complete litter resorptions and increased post-implantation loss. 

Acute dietary (General population including infants 

and children).

NOAEL = 250 mg/kg/day ..

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

FQPA SF = 1x 

Acute RfD = 2.5 mg/kg/day 

aPAD = 2.5 mg/kg/day 

Neurotoxicity screening battery-rat LOAEL = 750 mg/ 

kg/day based on decreased body weight, bodyweight gain, absolute and relative food consumption, and clinical signs of toxicity in both sexes: Dehydration, urine-stained abdominal fur, ungroomed 

coat, ptosis, decreased motor activity, prostration, 

limp muscle tone, muscle flaccidity, hypothermia, 

hunched posture, impaired or lost righting reflex, 

scant feces; in males: red or tan perioral substance, 

chromodacryorrhea, chromorhinorrhea and labored 

breathing, and in females: piloerection and 

bradypnea. 

Chronic dietary (All populations).NOAEL= 5 mg/kg/day .......

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

FQPA SF = 1x 

Chronic RfD = 0.05 mg/kg/ 

day.

cPAD = 0.05 mg/kg/day 

Chronic toxicity-dog LOAEL = 20 mg/kg/day based on 

adverse liver findings (increased liver weights, increased centrilobular hepatocyte lipid in the liver, 

and increases in alkaline phosphatase, albumin, and 

triglycerides), increased adrenal cortical vacuolation 

of the zona fasciculata, and marked hemosiderin 

pigmentation in the liver and spleen in both sexes; 

mild anemia (characterized by decreased hemoglobin, hematocrit, and red blood cell count) in the 

males; and initial body weight losses, decreased cumulative body-weight gains, and increased adrenal 

weights in the females. 

Dermal short-term (1 to 30 

days)—and Intermediate 

(1–6 months)—Term.

Dermal (or oral) study 

NOAEL = 7.5 mg/kg/day 

(dermal absorption rate 

= 21%).

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

FQPA SF = 1x 

LOC for MOE = 100 .......... Developmental toxicity-rabbit LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day 

based on decreased number of live fetuses, complete litter resorptions and increased post-implantation loss 

Inhalation short-term (1 to 

30 days)—and Intermediate (1–6 months)— 

Term.

Inhalation (or oral) study 

NOAEL= 7.5 mg/kg/day 

(inhalation absorption 

rate = 100%).

LOC for MOE = 100 .......... Developmental toxicity-rabbit LOAEL = 15 mg/kg/day 

based on decreased number of live fetuses, complete litter resorptions and increased post-implantation loss. 

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

FQPA SF = 1x 

Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).Classification: ‘‘Not likely to be Carcinogenic to Humans’’ based on the carcinogenicity studies in rats and mice. 

UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population 

(intraspecies). FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference 

dose. MOE = margin of exposure. mg/kg/day = milligrams/kilogram/day. LOC = level of concern. 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 9, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 69645 

C. Exposure Assessment 

1. Dietary exposure from food and 

feed uses. In evaluating dietary 

exposure to flutriafol, EPA considered 

exposure under the petitioned-for 

tolerances as well as all existing 

flutriafol tolerances in 40 CFR 180.629. 

EPA assessed dietary exposures from 

flutriafol 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. Such effects were identified 

for flutriafol. In estimating acute dietary 

exposure, EPA used food consumption 

information from the United States 

Department of Agriculture (USDA) 

1994–1996 and 1998 Nationwide 

Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by 

Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels 

in food, EPA made the following 

assumptions for the acute exposure 

assessment: tolerance-level residues and 

100% crop treated (CT). EPA used 

DEEMTM version 7.81 default processing 

factors. 

ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting 

the chronic dietary exposure assessment 

EPA used the food consumption data 

from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998 

CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA 

made the following assumptions for the 

chronic exposure assessment: tolerancelevel residues and 100% crop treated 

(CT). EPA used DEEMTM version 7.81 

default processing factors. 

iii. Cancer. Based on the data 

summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has 

concluded that flutriafol does not pose 

a cancer risk to humans. Therefore, a 

dietary exposure assessment for the 

purpose of assessing cancer risk is 

unnecessary. 

iv. Anticipated residue and percent 

crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did 

not use anticipated residue or PCT 

information in the dietary assessment 

for flutriafol. Tolerance level residues 

and 100% CT were assumed for all food 

commodities. 

2. Dietary exposure from drinking 

water. The Agency used screening level 

water exposure models in the dietary 

exposure analysis and risk assessment 

for flutriafol in drinking water. These 

simulation models take into account 

data on the physical, chemical, and fate/ 

transport characteristics of flutriafol. 

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 FQPA Index Reservoir 

Screening Tool (FIRST), and Pesticide 

Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM 

GW), the estimated drinking water 

concentrations (EDWCs) of flutriafol for 

acute exposures are estimated to be 48.5 

parts per billion (ppb) for surface water 

and 310 ppb for ground water. 

For chronic exposures for non-cancer 

assessments the EDWC’s are estimated 

to be 5.70 ppb for surface water and 202 

ppb for ground water. 

Modeled estimates of drinking water 

concentrations were directly entered 

into the dietary exposure model. For 

acute dietary risk assessment, the water 

concentration value of 310 ppb was 

used to assess the contribution to 

drinking water. 

For chronic dietary risk assessment, 

the water concentration value of 202 

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, 

indoor pest control, termiticides, and 

flea and tick control on pets). Flutriafol 

is not registered for any specific use 

patterns that would result in residential 

exposure. 

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.’’ 

Flutriafol is a member of the triazolecontaining class of pesticides. Although 

conazoles act similarly in plants (fungi) 

by inhibiting ergosterol biosynthesis, 

there is not necessarily a relationship 

between their pesticidal activity and 

their mechanism of toxicity in 

mammals. Structural similarities do not 

constitute a common mechanism of 

toxicity. Evidence is needed to establish 

that the chemicals operate by the same, 

or essentially the same, sequence of 

major biochemical events (EPA, 2002). 

In conazoles, however, a variable 

pattern of toxicological responses is 

found; some are hepatotoxic and 

hepatocarcinogenic in mice. Some 

induce thyroid tumors in rats. Some 

induce developmental, reproductive, 

and neurological effects in rodents. 

Furthermore, the conazoles produce a 

diverse range of biochemical events 

including altered cholesterol levels, 

stress responses, and altered DNA 

methylation. It is not clearly understood 

whether these biochemical events are 

directly connected to their toxicological 

outcomes. Thus, there is currently no 

evidence to indicate that conazoles 

share common mechanisms of toxicity 

and EPA is not following a cumulative 

risk approach based on a common 

mechanism of toxicity for the conazoles. 

For information regarding EPA’s 

procedures for cumulating effects from 

substances found to have a common 

mechanism of toxicity, see EPA’s Web 

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

cumulative. 

Triazole-derived pesticides can form 

the metabolite 1,2,4-triazole (T) and two 

triazole conjugates triazolylalanine (TA) 

and triazolylacetic acid (TAA). To 

support existing tolerances and to 

establish new tolerances for triazolederivative pesticides, EPA conducted an 

initial human-health risk assessment for 

exposure to T, TA, and TAA resulting 

from the use of all current and pending 

uses of any triazole-derived fungicide as 

of September 1, 2005. The risk 

assessment was a highly conservative, 

screening-level evaluation in terms of 

hazards associated with common 

metabolites (e.g., use of a maximum 

combination of uncertainty factors) and 

potential dietary and non-dietary 

exposures (i.e., high-end estimates of 

both dietary and non-dietary exposures). 

In addition, the Agency retained the 

additional 10X FQPA SF for the 

protection of infants and children. The 

assessment included evaluations of risks 

for various subgroups, including those 

comprised of infants and children. The 

Agency’s complete risk assessment can 

be found in the propiconazole 

reregistration docket at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, docket ID Number 

EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–0497 and an 

update to assess the addition of the 

commodities included in this action 

may be found in docket ID EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2011–0120 in the document 

entitled ‘‘Common Triazole Metabolites: 

Updated Dietary (Food + Water) 

Exposure and Risk Assessment to 

Address the Amended metconazole 

Section 3 Registration to Add uses on 

Tuberous and Corm Vegetables (Group 

1C) and Bushberry Subgroup 13–07B’’. 

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 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
69646 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 9, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 

The potential impact of in utero and 

perinatal flutriafol exposure was 

investigated in three developmental 

toxicity studies (two in rats, one in 

rabbits) and two multigenerational 

reproduction toxicity studies in rats. In 

the first of two rat developmental 

toxicity studies, a quantitative 

susceptibility was observed (delayed 

ossification or non-ossification of the 

skeleton in the fetuses) at a lower dose 

than maternal effects. In the second rat 

developmental study, a qualitative 

susceptibility was noted. Although 

developmental toxicity occurred at the 

same dose level that elicited maternal 

toxicity, the developmental effects 

(external, visceral, and skeletal 

malformations; embryo lethality; 

skeletal variations; a generalized delay 

in fetal development; and fewer live 

fetuses) were more severe than the 

decreased food consumption and bodyweight gains observed in the dams. For 

rabbits, intrauterine deaths occurred at 

a dose level that also caused adverse 

effects in maternal animals. In the twogeneration reproduction studies, a 

qualitative susceptibility was also seen. 

Effects in the offspring—decreased litter 

size and percentage of live births 

(increased pup mortality) and liver 

toxicity can be attributed to the systemic 

toxicity of the parental animals 

(decreased body weight and food 

consumption and liver toxicity). 

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 flutriafol is 

complete. 

ii. There is no concern for 

neurotoxicity with flutriafol. Signs of 

neurotoxicity were reported in the acute 

and subchronic neurotoxicity studies at 

the highest dose only; however, these 

effects were primarily seen in animals 

that were agonal (at the point of death) 

and, thus, are not indicative of 

neurotoxicity. In addition, there was no 

evidence of neurotoxicity in any 

additional short-term studies in rats, 

mice, and dogs, or in the long-term 

toxicity studies in rats, mice, and dogs. 

A developmental neurotoxicity study is 

not needed given these results. 

iii. There are no concerns or residual 

uncertainties for prenatal and/or 

postnatal toxicity. Though there is 

evidence for increased susceptibility in 

the prenatal studies in rats and rabbits 

and the two-generation reproduction 

study in rats, there are no concerns for 

the offspring toxicity observed in the 

developmental and reproductive 

toxicity studies for the following 

reasons: 

• Clear NOAELs and LOAELs were 

established in the fetuses/offspring for 

each of these studies; 

• The dose-response for these effects 

is well defined and characterized; 

• Developmental endpoints are used 

for assessing acute dietary risks to the 

most sensitive population (females 13– 

49 years old) as well as all other shortand intermediate-term exposure 

scenarios; and 

• The chronic reference dose is 

greater than 300-fold lower than the 

dose at which the offspring effects were 

observed in the two-generation 

reproduction studies. 

iv. There are no residual uncertainties 

identified in the exposure databases. 

The dietary food exposure assessments 

were performed based on 100% CT and 

tolerance-level residues. EPA made 

conservative (protective) assumptions in 

the ground and surface water modeling 

used to assess exposure to flutriafol in 

drinking water. These assessments will 

not underestimate the exposure and 

risks posed by flutriafol. 

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. Using the exposure 

assumptions discussed in this unit for 

acute exposure, the acute dietary 

exposure from food and water to 

flutriafol will occupy 24% of the aPAD 

for females 13–49 years old, the 

population group receiving the greatest 

exposure. 

2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure 

assumptions described in this unit for 

chronic exposure, EPA has concluded 

that chronic exposure to flutriafol from 

food and water will utilize 42% of the 

cPAD for all infants less than 1 year old, 

the population group receiving the 

greatest exposure. There are no 

residential uses for flutriafol. 

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). Flutriafol is not 

registered for any use patterns that 

would result in residential exposure. 

Therefore, the short-term aggregate risk 

is the sum of the risk from exposure to 

flutriafol through food and water and 

will not be greater than the chronic 

aggregate 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). 

Flutriafol is not registered for any use 

patterns that would result in 

intermediate-term residential exposure. 

Therefore, the intermediate-term 

aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from 

exposure to flutriafol through food and 

water, which has already been 

addressed, and will not be greater than 

the chronic aggregate risk. 

5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. 

population. Based on the lack of 

evidence of carcinogenicity in two 

adequate rodent carcinogenicity studies, 

flutriafol is not expected to pose a 

cancer risk to humans. 

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 flutriafol 

residues. 

IV. Other Considerations 

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

Adequate enforcement methodology, 

(gas chromatography/Nitrogen/ 

Phosphorus detector (NPD) for 

tolerances and method ICIA AM00306 

for ruminant liver) 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 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 9, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 69647 

required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). 

The Codex Alimentarius is a joint U.N. 

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 

flutriafol. 

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For 

Tolerances 

Based on an analysis of residue levels 

from crop field trials, EPA raised 

tolerance levels for direct application to 

grape; peanut; fruit, stone, group 12–10; 

and rotational crop tolerances for corn, 

sweet, forage. For the same reason, EPA 

lowered tolerance levels for direct 

application to banana (import); grape, 

raisin; fruit, pome, group 11–09; beet, 

sugar; and rotational crop tolerances for 

corn, sweet, stover; corn, field, forage; 

and cotton, gin byproducts were 

lowered. 

Additional residue chemistry data are 

needed to support tolerances for 

direction application to corn, field, 

forage; corn, field, stover; corn, field, 

grain; corn, field, flour; corn, field, 

refined oil; corn, field, meal; corn, pop; 

corn, pop, stover; wheat, forage; wheat, 

hay; wheat, straw; wheat, grain; wheat, 

grain bran; wheat, grain, germ; triticale, 

grain; barley, hay; barley, straw; barley, 

grain; barley, grain, bran; buckwheat, 

grain; oat, forage; oat, hay; oat, straw; 

oat, grain; oat, grain, bran; rye, forage; 

rye, straw; and rye, grain and the 

proposed milk tolerance. Accordingly, 

EPA has not made a determination with 

regard to these petitioned-for tolerances 

at this time. 

EPA is not establishing a tolerance for 

sugar beet tops because the Agency no 

longer considers sugar beet tops to be a 

feed item. EPA has required a label 

prohibition on feeding of flutriafoltreated peanut hay, and thus is not 

establishing a peanut hay tolerance. 

Based on results of the sugar beet 

processing study, EPA has determined 

that tolerances are unnecessary for beet, 

sugar, refined; beet sugar, molasses; and 

beet, sugar dried pulp. These processed 

commodities are adequately covered by 

the associated raw agricultural 

tolerances. 

V. Conclusion 

Therefore, tolerances are established 

for residues of flutriafol, ((±)-a-(2- 

fluorophenyl)-a-(4-fluorophenyl)-1H1,2,4-triazole-1-ethanol, in or on banana 

(import) at 0.30 ppm; grape at 1.5 ppm; 

grape, raisin at 2.4 ppm; peanut at 0.09 

ppm; fruit, pome (crop group 11–09) at 

0.40 ppm; fruit, stone (crop group 12– 

10) at 1.5 ppm; beet, sugar at 0.08 ppm; 

and to the rotation to corn, sweet, forage 

at 0.09 ppm; corn, sweet, stover at 0.07 

ppm; corn, sweet, kernels plus cob with 

husks removed at 0.01 ppm; corn, field, 

forage at 0.09 ppm; corn, field, stover at 

0.07 ppm; corn, field, grain at 0.01 ppm; 

corn, field, refined oil at 0.02 ppm; corn, 

pop, stover at 0.07 ppm; corn, pop at 

0.01 ppm; cotton, undelinted seed at 

0.01 ppm; and cotton, gin byproducts at 

0.02 ppm. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This final rule establishes tolerances 

under section 408(d) of FFDCA in 

response to petitions 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 section 408(d) of FFDCA, 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 section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. 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: October 28, 2011. 

Lois Rossi, 

Director, Registration Division, 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 180.629 is amended by 

alphabetically adding the following 

commodities to the table in paragraph 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
69648 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 9, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

(a), by adding a new footnote 1, and by 

revising paragraph (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 180.629 Flutriafol; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * 

Commodity Parts per million 

*******

Banana1 ............................................................................................................................................................................... 0.30 

Beet, sugar .......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.08 

*******

Fruit, pome, group 11–09 .................................................................................................................................................... 0.40 

Fruit, stone, group 12–10 .................................................................................................................................................... 1.5 

*******

Grape ................................................................................................................................................................................... 1.5 

Grape, raisin ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2.4 

*******

Peanut .................................................................................................................................................................................. 0.09 

*******

1There are no U.S. registrations as of October 26, 2011. 

* * * * * 

(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. 

Tolerances are established for the 

indirect or inadvertent residues of the 

fungicide flutriafol, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table below when 

present therein as a result of the 

application of flutriafol to the growing 

crops listed in the table to paragraph (a) 

of this section. Compliance with the 

following tolerance levels specified 

below is to be determined by measuring 

only flutriafol ((±)-a-(2-fluorophenyl)-a- 

(4-fluorophenyl)-1H-1,2,4-triazole-1- 

ethanol) in or on the following 

commodities: 

Commodity Parts per million 

Corn, field, forage ................................................................................................................................................................ 0.09 

Corn, field, grain .................................................................................................................................................................. 0.01 

Corn, field, refined oil .......................................................................................................................................................... 0.02 

Corn, field, stover ................................................................................................................................................................ 0.07 

Corn, pop ............................................................................................................................................................................. 0.01 

Corn, pop, stover ................................................................................................................................................................. 0.07 

Corn, sweet, forage ............................................................................................................................................................. 0.09 

Corn, sweet, kernel plus cob with husk removed ............................................................................................................... 0.01 

Corn, sweet, stover .............................................................................................................................................................. 0.07 

Cotton, gin byproducts ......................................................................................................................................................... 0.02 

Cotton, undelinted seed ....................................................................................................................................................... 0.01 

[FR Doc. 2011–28947 Filed 11–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0456; FRL–8890–1] 

Trifloxystrobin; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes 

tolerances for residues of trifloxystrobin 

in or on alfalfa, forage and alfalfa, hay. 

Bayer CropScience requested these 

tolerances under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

November 9, 2011. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before January 9, 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: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under docket 

identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2011–0456. All documents in the 

docket are listed in the docket index 

available at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available in the electronic docket at 

http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the OPP 

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– 

4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 

2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The 

Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. 

to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The Docket 

Facility telephone number is (703) 305– 

5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tawanda Maignan, Registration 

Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (703) 308–8050; email address: 

Maignan.Tawanda@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES