Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 26153 

[FR Doc. 2014–09885 Filed 5–6–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0653; FRL–9909–31] 

Tebuconazole; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes 

tolerances for residues of tebuconazole 

in or on orange and orange, oil. Bayer 

CropScience, LP requested these 

tolerances under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective May 

7, 2014 Objections and requests for 

hearings must be received on or before 

July 7, 2014, 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–2013–0653, is 

available at http://www.regulations.gov 

or at the Office of Pesticide Programs 

Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) 

in the Environmental Protection Agency 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West 

Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. The 

Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 

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

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 

telephone number for the Public 

Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and 

the telephone number for the OPP 

Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review 

the visitor instructions and additional 

information about the docket available 

at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois 

Rossi, Registration Division (7505P), 

Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 305–7090; email address: 

RDFRNotices.First@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

B. How can I get electronic access to 

other related information? 

You may access a frequently updated 

electronic version of EPA’s tolerance 

regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through 

the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR 

site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&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–2013–0653 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 July 7, 2014. Addresses for mail 

and hand delivery of objections and 

hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 

178.25(b). 

In addition to filing an objection or 

hearing request with the Hearing Clerk 

as described in 40 CFR part 178, please 

submit a copy of the filing (excluding 

any Confidential Business Information 

(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. 

Information not marked confidential 

pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be 

disclosed publicly by EPA without prior 

notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your 

objection or hearing request, identified 

by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2013–0653, 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), (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 October 25, 

2013 (78 FR 63938) (FRL–9901–96), 

EPA issued a document pursuant to 

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

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

pesticide petition (PP 2E8138) by Bayer 

CropScience LP, P.O. Box 12014, 2 T. 

W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27709. The petition requested 

that EPA establish import tolerances for 

residues of the fungicide tebuconazole, 

in or on orange, whole fruit at 1 part per 

million (ppm); orange, juice at 0.15 

ppm; and orange, oil at 400 ppm. That 

document referenced a summary of the 

petition prepared by Bayer CropScience 

LP, the registrant, which is available in 

the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. 

Subsequently, the petitioner submitted a 

revised petition that requested different 

tolerance levels for orange juice and 

orange oil. The Agency published a 

second notice of filing document in the 

Federal Register of February 25, 2014 

(79 FR 10458) (FRL–9906–77), noting 

the revisions for the uses in/on orange, 

juice from 0.15 ppm to 0.7 ppm; orange, 

oil from 400 ppm to 20 ppm. There were 

no comments received concerning this 

petition. 

Based upon review of the data 

supporting the petition, the proposed 

tolerance for orange, juice is 

unnecessary. The proposed tolerance for 

orange, oil was lowered. 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 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
26154 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to 

give special consideration to exposure 

of infants and children to the pesticide 

chemical residue in establishing a 

tolerance and to ‘‘ensure that there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result to infants and children from 

aggregate exposure to the pesticide 

chemical residue. . . .’’ 

Consistent with FFDCA section 

408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified in 

FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has 

reviewed the available scientific data 

and other relevant information in 

support of this action. EPA has 

sufficient data to assess the hazards of 

and to make a determination on 

aggregate exposure for tebuconazole 

including exposure resulting from the 

tolerances established by this action. 

EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks 

associated with tebuconazole follows. 

A. Toxicological Profile 

EPA has evaluated the available 

toxicity data and considered its validity, 

completeness, and reliability as well as 

the relationship of the results of the 

studies to human risk. EPA has also 

considered available information 

concerning the variability of the 

sensitivities of major identifiable 

subgroups of consumers, including 

infants and children. The hazard 

characterization remains unchanged 

from the assessment upon which the 

final rule published in the Federal 

Register on November 15, 2013 (78 FR 

68741) (FRL–9392–1) is based. 

Specific information on the studies 

received and the nature of the adverse 

effects caused by tebuconazole as well 

as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level 

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

toxicity studies are discussed in the 

preamble to that final rule and its 

supporting documents as well as the 

most recent human health risk 

assessment, ‘‘Tebuconazole: Human 

Health Risk Assessment for Tolerance 

on Imported Oranges’’, which can be 

found at http://www.regulations.gov, 

under docket ID number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2013–0653–0004. 

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 the NOAEL are observed 

and the LOAEL are identified. 

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 nonthreshold 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 tebuconazole used for 

human risk assessment is shown in the 

table contained in Unit III.B. of the 

preamble to the final rule published in 

the Federal Register issue of November 

15, 2013. 

C. Exposure Assessment 

1. Dietary exposure from food and 

feed uses. In evaluating dietary 

exposure to tebuconazole, EPA 

considered exposure under the 

petitioned-for tolerances as well as all 

existing tebuconazole tolerances in 40 

CFR 180.474. EPA assessed dietary 

exposures from tebuconazole 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 

tebuconazole. In estimating acute 

dietary exposure, EPA used food 

consumption information from the 

United States Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) 2003–2008 National Health and 

Nutrition Examination Survey, What We 

Eat in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As 

to residue levels in food, a somewhat 

refined acute probabilistic dietary 

exposure assessment was conducted for 

all existing and proposed food uses of 

tebuconazole. EPA used the latest USDA 

Pesticide Data Program (PDP) 

monitoring data, field trial data, percent 

crop treated (PCT) data and empirical 

and DEEM (ver. 7.81) default processing 

factors. 

ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting 

the chronic dietary exposure assessment 

EPA used the food consumption data 

from the USDA’s (NHANES/WWEIA) 

conducted from 2003–2008 as well. As 

to the residue levels in food, EPA made 

the following assumptions for the 

chronic exposure assessment: As to 

residue levels in food, EPA used field 

trial data, USDA PDP data, assumed 

PCT data levels and used empirical and 

DEEM (ver. 7.81) default processing 

factors as described in Unit III.C.1.iv. 

iii. Cancer. The Agency determined 

that cancer dietary risk concerns due to 

long-term consumption of tebuconazole 

residues are adequately addressed by 

the chronic dietary exposure analysis 

using the reference dose; i.e.. the 

chronic dietary risk assessments is 

considered to be protective of any 

cancer effects, and therefore, a separate 

cancer dietary exposure analysis was 

not performed. 

iv. Anticipated residue and PCT 

information. Section 408(b)(2)(E) of 

FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available 

data and information on the anticipated 

residue levels of pesticide residues in 

food and the actual levels of pesticide 

residues that have been measured in 

food. If EPA relies on such information, 

EPA must require pursuant to FFDCA 

section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 

years after the tolerance is established, 

modified, or left in effect, demonstrating 

that the levels in food are not above the 

levels anticipated. For the present 

action, EPA will issue such data call-ins 

as are required by FFDCA section 

408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under 

FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be 

required to be submitted no later than 

5 years from the date of issuance of 

these tolerances. 

Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states 

that the Agency may use data on the 

actual percent of food treated for 

assessing chronic dietary risk only if: 

• Condition a: The data used are 

reliable and provide a valid basis to 

show what percentage of the food 

derived from such crop is likely to 

contain the pesticide residue. 

• Condition b: The exposure estimate 

does not underestimate exposure for any 

significant subpopulation group. 

• Condition c: Data are available on 

pesticide use and food consumption in 

a particular area, the exposure estimate 

does not understate exposure for the 

population in such area. 

In addition, the Agency must provide 

for periodic evaluation of any estimates 

used. To provide for the periodic 

evaluation of the estimate of PCT as 

required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), 

EPA may require registrants to submit 

data on PCT. 

For the acute assessment, the Agency 

estimated the maximum PCT estimates 

for existing uses as follows: Almonds 

2.5%; apples 2.5%; apricots 20%; barley 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 26155 

2.5%; beans green 2.5%; cantaloupes 

10%; cherries 45%; corn 2.5%; cotton 

2.5%; dry beans/peas 5%; garlic 95%; 

grapes 35%; onions 5%; peaches 25%; 

peanuts 55%; pears 5%; plums/prunes 

5%; soybeans 2.5%; sweet corn 5%; and 

wheat 25%. 

For the chronic assessment, the 

Agency estimated the average PCT 

estimates for existing uses as follows: 

Almonds 1%; apples 1%; apricots 10%; 

asparagus 5%; barley 2.5%; beans green 

1%; cantaloupes 5%; cherries 30%; corn 

1%; cotton 1%; dry beans/peas 2.5%; 

garlic 60%; grapes 20%; nectarines 

10%; onions 5%; peaches 15%; peanuts 

40%; pears 5%; pecans 5%; pistachios 

2.5%; plums/prunes 2.5%; pumpkins 

2.5%; soybeans 1%; squash 2.5%; sweet 

corn 2.5%; watermelons 10%; and 

wheat 20%. 

In most cases, EPA uses available data 

from United States Department of 

Agriculture/National Agricultural 

Statistics Service (USDA/NASS), 

proprietary market surveys, and the 

National Pesticide Use Database for the 

chemical/crop combination for the most 

recent 6–7 years. EPA uses an average 

PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis. 

The average PCT figure for each existing 

use is derived by combining available 

public and private market survey data 

for that use, averaging across all 

observations, and rounding to the 

nearest 5%, except for those situations 

in which the average PCT is less than 

one. In those cases, 1% is used as the 

average PCT and 2.5% is used as the 

maximum PCT. EPA uses a maximum 

PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The 

maximum PCT figure is the highest 

observed maximum value reported 

within the recent 6 years of available 

public and private market survey data 

for the existing use and rounded up to 

the nearest multiple of 5%. 

Subsequently, the Agency use 

estimated percent import estimates from 

the most recent (2013) screening level 

usage and analysis available for orange 

juice and oranges at 27.7% and 7.7%, 

respectively. Since usage data are not 

available for other countries, the Agency 

assumes that all of the imported orange 

commodities are treated. 

The Agency believes that the three 

conditions discussed in Unit III.C.1.iv. 

have been met. With respect to 

Condition a, PCT estimates are derived 

from Federal and private market survey 

data, which are reliable and have a valid 

basis. The Agency is reasonably certain 

that the percentage of the food treated 

is not likely to be an underestimation. 

As to Conditions b and c, regional 

consumption information and 

consumption information for significant 

subpopulations is taken into account 

through EPA’s computer-based model 

for evaluating the exposure of 

significant subpopulations including 

several regional groups. Use of this 

consumption information in EPA’s risk 

assessment process ensures that EPA’s 

exposure estimate does not understate 

exposure for any significant 

subpopulation group and allows the 

Agency to be reasonably certain that no 

regional population is exposed to 

residue levels higher than those 

estimated by the Agency. Other than the 

data available through national food 

consumption surveys, EPA does not 

have available reliable information on 

the regional consumption of food to 

which tebuconazole may be applied in 

a particular area. 

2. Dietary exposure from drinking 

water. The Agency used screening level 

water exposure models in the dietary 

exposure analysis and risk assessment 

for tebuconazole in drinking water. 

These simulation models take into 

account data on the physical, chemical, 

and fate/transport characteristics of 

tebuconazole. 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 

tebuconazole for acute exposures are 

estimated to be 87.7 parts per billion 

(ppb) for surface water and 1.56 ppb for 

ground water and for chronic exposures 

are estimated to be 68.8 ppb for surface 

water and 1.56 ppb for ground water. 

Modeled estimates of drinking water 

concentrations were directly entered 

into the dietary exposure model. For the 

acute dietary risk assessment, a 

distribution of 30-year daily surface 

water concentrations was estimated for 

the EDWCs of tebuconazole. For chronic 

dietary risk assessment, the water 

concentration of value 68.8 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). 

Tebuconazole is currently registered 

for the following uses that could result 

in residential exposures: Turf, flower 

gardens, trees, ornamentals, and 

pressure-treated wood. EPA assessed 

residential exposure using the following 

assumptions: For residential handlers, 

exposure is expected to be short-term. 

Intermediate-term exposures are not 

likely because of the intermittent nature 

of applications by homeowners. Dermal 

and inhalation exposures were 

combined since the same endpoint and 

POD is used for both routes of exposure. 

Residential post-application dermal 

exposure was assessed for adults and 

children golfing, and working in 

gardens. Incidental oral post-application 

exposure was assessed for children 1 to 

2 years old performing physical 

activities on pressure-treated wood after 

application of tebuconazole. Both life 

stages may receive exposure to 

tebuconazole residues. Post-application 

exposure is expected to be short-term in 

duration. 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.’’ 

Tebuconazole is a member of the 

triazole-containing class of pesticides, 

the conazoles. Although conazoles act 

similarly in plants 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. 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 conclusive data 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 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
26156 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 

Tebuconazole is a triazole-derived 

pesticide. This class of compounds can 

form the common metabolite 1,2,4- 

triazole and two triazole conjugates 

(triazolylalanine and triazolylacetic 

acid). To support existing tolerances 

and to establish new tolerances 

fortriazole-derivative pesticides, 

including tebuconazole, EPA conducted 

a human health risk assessment for 

exposure to 1,2,4-triazole, 

triazolylalanine, and triazolylacetic acid 

resulting from the use of all current and 

pending uses of any triazole-derived 

fungicide. The risk assessment is 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 has reduced the 10X Food 

Quality Protection Act safety factor 

(FQPA SF) to 3X. The FQPA SF has 

been retained as an uncertainty fact for 

use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL 

uncertainty factor (UFL). The Agency’s 

complete risk assessment is found in the 

propiconazole reregistration docket at 

http://www.regulations.gov, docket ID 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–0497. 

An updated dietary exposure and risk 

analysis for the common triazole 

metabolites 1,2,4-triazole (T), 

triazolylalanine (TA), triazolylacetic 

acid (TAA), and triazolylpyruvic acid 

(TP) was conducted and completed in 

October 2013, in association with a 

registration request for several other 

triazole fungicides. That analysis 

concluded that risk estimates were 

below the Agency’s level of concern for 

all population groups. The addition of 

tolerances associated with this action to 

the exposure analyses do not 

significantly increase the exposure to 

triazole and its conjugates. This 

assessment may be found on http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

the following titles and docket numbers: 

‘‘Common Triazole Metabolites: 

Updated Aggregate Human Health Risk 

Assessment to Address The New 

Section 3 Registrations For Use of 

Prothioconazole on Rapeseed Crop 

Subgroup 20A; Use of Difenoconazole 

on Rapeseed Crop Subgroup 20A; and 

Use of Tebuconazole on Imported 

Oranges’’, located in docket ID number 

EPA–HQ–OPP–2013–0653–0005. 

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. 

The toxicity database for tebuconazole 

includes prenatal developmental 

toxicity studies in three species (mouse, 

rat, and rabbit), a reproductive toxicity 

study in rats, acute and subchronic 

neurotoxicity studies in rats, and a 

developmental neurotoxicity study in 

rats. The data from prenatal 

developmental toxicity studies in mice 

and a developmental neurotoxicity 

study in rats indicated an increased 

quantitative and qualitative 

susceptibility following in utero 

exposure to tebuconazole. The NOAELs/ 

LOAELs for developmental toxicity in 

these studies were found at dose levels 

less than those that induce maternal 

toxicity or in the presence of slight 

maternal toxicity. There was no 

indication of increased quantitative 

susceptibility in the rat and rabbit 

developmental toxicity studies, the 

NOAELs for developmental toxicity 

were comparable to or higher than the 

NOAELs for maternal toxicity. In all 

three species, however, there was 

indication of increased qualitative 

susceptibility. For most studies, 

minimal maternal toxicity was seen at 

the LOAEL (consisting of increases in 

hematological findings in mice, 

increased liver weights in rabbits and 

rats, and decreased body weight gain/

food consumption in rats) and did not 

increase substantially in severity at 

higher doses. However, there was more 

concern for the developmental effects at 

each LOAEL, which included increases 

in runts, increased fetal loss, and 

malformations in mice; increased 

skeletal variations in rats; and increased 

fetal loss and frank malformations in 

rabbits. Additionally, more severe 

developmental effects (including frank 

malformations) were seen at higher 

doses in mice, rats and rabbits. In the 

developmental neurotoxicity study, 

maternal toxicity was seen only at the 

high dose (decreased body weights, 

body weight gains, and food 

consumption, prolonged gestation with 

mortality, and increased number of dead 

fetuses), while offspring toxicity 

(including decreases in body weight, 

brain weight, brain measurements, and 

functional activities) was seen at all 

doses. 

Available data indicated greater 

sensitivity of the developing organism 

to exposure to tebuconazole, as 

demonstrated by increases in qualitative 

sensitivity in prenatal developmental 

toxicity studies in rats, mice, and 

rabbits, and by increases in both 

qualitative and quantitative sensitivity 

in the developmental neurotoxicity 

study in rats with tebuconazole. 

However, the degree of concern is low 

because the toxic endpoints in the 

prenatal developmental toxicity studies 

were well characterized with clear 

NOAELs established and the most 

sensitive endpoint, which is found in 

the developmental neurotoxicity study, 

has been used for overall risk 

assessments. Therefore, there are no 

residual uncertainties for prenatal and/ 

or postnatal susceptibility. 

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 3X. That decision is 

based on the following findings: 

i. The toxicity database for 

tebuconazole is complete. 

ii. Tebuconazole demonstrated 

neurotoxicity in the acute neurotoxicity 

study in rats; the LOAEL of 100 

milligrams/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day) 

was based on increased motor activity 

in male and female rats and decreased 

footsplay in female rats. 

Malformations indicative of nervous 

system development disruption were 

seen in developmental toxicity studies 

in mice, rats, and rabbits. Neurotoxicity 

was also seen in offspring in the 

developmental neurotoxicity study in 

rats. The LOAEL of 8.8 mg/kg/day was 

based on decreases in body weights, 

decreases in absolute brain weights, 

changes in brain morphometric 

parameters, and decreases in motor 

activity. A NOAEL could not be 

established. However, the LOAEL (8.8 

mg/kg/day) was employed as the point 

of departure in assessing the risk for all 

exposure scenarios, and the FQPA SF is 

retained as a UFL (i.e., use of a LOAEL 

to extrapolate a NOAEL). A Benchmark 

Dose (BMD) analysis of the datasets 

relevant to the adverse offspring effects 

(decreased body weight and brain 

weight) seen at the LOAEL in the DNT 

study was conducted. All of the BMDLs 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 26157 

(benchmark dose limit) modeled 

successfully on statistically significant 

effects are 1–2X lower than the LOAEL. 

The results also indicate that an 

extrapolated NOAEL is not likely to be 

10X lower than the LOAEL and that use 

of an UFL of 3X would not 

underestimate risk. Therefore, the 

analysis supports reducing the UFL from 

10X to 3X. Using an UFL of 3X in risk 

assessment (8.8 mg/kg/day ÷ 3X = 2.9 

mg/kg/day) is further supported by 

other studies in the tebuconazole 

toxicity database: Those studies with 

the lowest NOAELs were a 

developmental toxicity study in mice at 

3 mg/kg/day and a chronic toxicity 

study in dogs at 2.9 mg/kg/day, with 

effects being seen at respective LOAELs 

of 10 and 4.5 mg/kg/day. 

iii. Although there is qualitative 

evidence of increased susceptibility in 

the prenatal developmental studies in 

rats, the Agency did not identify any 

residual uncertainties after establishing 

toxicity endpoints and traditional UFs 

to be used in the risk assessment of 

tebuconazole. The degree of concern for 

residual uncertainties for prenatal and/ 

or postnatal toxicity is low. 

iv. There are no residual uncertainties 

identified in the exposure databases. 

EPA utilized a tiered approach in 

estimating exposure to tebuconazole. 

While some refinements were 

incorporated into dietary and residential 

exposure calculations, EPA is confident 

that the aggregate risk from exposure to 

tebuconazole in food, water and 

residential pathways will not be 

underestimated. The acute and chronic 

dietary exposure assessments 

incorporated refined estimates of 

residues in food commodities from 

reliable field trial data reflecting 

maximum use conditions, recent 

monitoring data from USDA’s PDP, and 

relevant market survey data on the 

percentage of crops treated. Estimated 

concentrations of tebuconazole in 

drinking water were incorporated into 

the chronic dietary analysis as the upper 

bound point estimate and into the 

probabilistic acute dietary analysis as a 

distribution. For the residential 

exposure pathway (ornamentals, golf 

course turf, and treated wood products), 

potential exposure resulting from 

tebuconazole outdoor uses in the 

residential setting was assessed using 

screening-level inputs that assumes an 

adult or child will come in contact with 

turf and other surfaces immediately 

after application. 

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 

tebuconazole will occupy 84% of the 

aPAD for children 1–2 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 tebuconazole 

from food and water will utilize 14.3% 

of the cPAD for all infants <1 year old, 

the population group receiving the 

greatest exposure. Based on the 

explanation in Unit III.C.3., regarding 

residential use patterns, chronic 

residential exposure to residues of 

tebuconazole is not expected. 

3. Short-term risk. Short-term 

aggregate exposure takes into account 

short-term residential exposure plus 

chronic exposure to food and water 

(considered to be a background 

exposure level). 

Tebuconazole is currently registered 

for uses that could result in short-term 

residential exposure, and the Agency 

has determined that it is appropriate to 

aggregate chronic exposure through food 

and water with short-term residential 

exposures to tebuconazole. 

Using the exposure assumptions 

described in this unit for short-term 

exposures, EPA has concluded the 

combined chronic food, water, and 

short-term residential exposures result 

in aggregate MOEs of 310 for adult 

handlers (post-application); 1,200 for 

children 11–16 years old (postapplication); 510 for children 6–11 years 

old (post-application); and 350 for 

children 1–2 years old (postapplication). Because EPA’s level of 

concern for tebuconazole is a MOE of 

300 or below, these MOEs are not of 

concern. 

4. Intermediate-term risk. 

Intermediate-term aggregate exposure 

takes into account intermediate-term 

residential exposure plus chronic 

exposure to food and water (considered 

to be a background exposure level). 

An intermediate-term adverse effect 

was identified; however, tebuconazole 

is not registered for any use patterns 

that would result in intermediate-term 

residential exposure. Intermediate-term 

risk is assessed based on intermediateterm residential exposure plus chronic 

dietary exposure. Because there is no 

intermediate-term residential exposure 

and chronic dietary exposure has 

already been assessed under the 

appropriately protective cPAD (which is 

at least as protective as the POD used to 

assess intermediate-term risk), no 

further assessment of intermediate-term 

risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the 

chronic dietary risk assessment for 

evaluating intermediate-term risk for 

tebuconazole. 

5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. 

population. Based on the results of the 

chronic risk assessment, which the 

Agency considers to be protective of any 

cancer effects, the Agency concludes 

that there is no cancer risk from 

aggregate exposure to tebuconazole. 

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 tebuconazole 

residues. 

IV. Other Considerations 

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

Adequate enforcement methodology 

(Gas chromatography/Nitrogen 

Phosphorus Detector (GC/NPD) Method 

101341) is available to enforce the 

tolerance expression. 

The method may be requested from: 

Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, 

Environmental Science Center, 701 

Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755–5350; 

telephone number: (410) 305–2905; 

email address: residuemethods@

epa.gov. 

B. International Residue Limits 

In making its tolerance decisions, EPA 

seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with 

international standards whenever 

possible, consistent with U.S. food 

safety standards and agricultural 

practices. EPA considers the 

international maximum residue limits 

(MRLs) established by the Codex 

Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as 

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

The Codex Alimentarius is a joint 

United Nations Food and Agriculture 

Organization/World Health 

Organization food standards program, 

and it is recognized as an international 

food safety standards-setting 

organization in trade agreements to 

which the United States is a party. EPA 

may establish a tolerance that is 

different from a Codex MRL; however, 

FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
26158 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 88 / Wednesday, May 7, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA explain the reasons for departing 

from the Codex level. 

There are no Codex, Canadian or 

Mexican MRLs for tebuconazole in/or 

on orange, oil and orange, juice. 

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For 

Tolerances 

Based on the analysis of orange 

processing data, EPA lowered the 

tolerance level for orange, oil to 10 ppm. 

Tolerances for orange, juice were 

unnecessary since the raw agricultural 

commodity tolerance of 1ppm covers 

the proposed juice tolerance. 

V. Conclusion 

Therefore, tolerances are established 

for residues of tebuconazole, in or on 

orange, oil at 10 ppm and orange, juice 

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) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.). 

This action does not involve any 

technical standards that would require 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). 

VII. Congressional Review Act 

Pursuant to the Congressional Review 

Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of the rule in the Federal 

Register. This action is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: April 28, 2014. 

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. In § 180.474, in the table in 

paragraph (a)(1), add alphabetically 

entries for ‘‘Orange 1’’ and ‘‘Orange, 

oil 1’’ and revise footnote 1 to read as 

follows: 

§ 180.474 Tebuconazole; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Orange 1 .................................... 1.0 

Orange, oil 1 .............................. 10 

* * * * * 

1There are no U.S. registrations. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–10216 Filed 5–6–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0588; FRL–9909–72] 

Fenoxaprop-ethyl; Pesticide 

Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a 

tolerance for residues of fenoxapropethyl (FE), in or on grass hay. 

Interregional Research Project Number 4 

(IR–4) requested this tolerance under 

the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 

Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective May 

7, 2014. Objections and requests for 

hearings must be received on or before 

July 7, 2014 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–2012–0588, is 

available at http://www.regulations.gov 

or at the Office of Pesticide Programs 

Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) 

in the Environmental Protection Agency 

Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West 

Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. The 

Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 

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

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 

telephone number for the Public 

Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and 

the telephone number for the OPP 

Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review 

the visitor instructions and additional 

information about the docket available 

at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES