Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 54127 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[ EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0120; FRL–8885–4] 

Tebuconazole; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes 

tolerances for residues of tebuconazole 

in or on wheat, grain; oats, grain; wheat, 

shorts; and wheat, germ. Bayer 

CropScience requested these tolerances 

under the Federal Food, Drug, and 

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

August 31, 2011. Objections and 

requests for hearings must be received 

on or before October 31, 2011, 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–2011–0120. 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: 

Tracy Keigwin, Registration Division 

(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 305–6605; e-mail address: 

keigwin.tracy@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–2011–0120 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 October 31, 2011. 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–2011–0120, 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 March 29, 

2011 (76 FR 17374) (FRL–8867–4), EPA 

issued a notice pursuant to section 

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

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

pesticide petition 0F7792 by Bayer 

CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, 

P.O. Box 12014, Research Triangle Park, 

NC 27709. The petition requested that 

40 CFR 180.474 be amended by revising 

tolerances for residues of the fungicide 

tebuconazole in or on wheat, grain; and 

oats, grain to 0.15 ppm in order to 

harmonize with MRLs established in 

Canada by PMRA. That notice 

referenced a summary of the petition 

prepared by Bayer CropScience, 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 has 

determined that tolerances on the 

following processed forms of wheat and 

oats are needed also: Wheat, shorts and 

wheat, germ, each at 0.20 ppm. 

Additionally, the Agency is establishing 

tolerances for tebuconazole of 0.20 ppm 

in shorts and germ of wheat. The 

reasons these additional tolerances are 

needed is 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 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
54128 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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 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. 

Tebuconazole has low acute toxicity 

by the oral or dermal route of exposure, 

and moderate toxicity by the inhalation 

route. It is not a dermal sensitizer or a 

dermal irritant; however, it is slightly to 

mildly irritating to the eye. With 

repeated dosing, the primary target 

organs of tebuconazole toxicity are the 

liver, the adrenals, the hematopoetic 

system and the nervous system. Effects 

on these target organs were seen in both 

rodent and non-rodent species. In 

addition, ocular lesions were seen in 

dogs (including lenticular degeneration 

and increased cataract formation) 

following subchronic or chronic 

exposure. Oral administration of 

tebuconazole caused developmental 

toxicity in all species evaluated (rat, 

rabbit and mouse), with the most 

prominent effects in the nervous system. 

The developmental toxicity studies, 

including the developmental 

neurotoxicity study, demonstrated an 

increase in susceptibility in developing 

fetuses both quantitatively and 

qualitatively. 

Tebuconazole was classified as a 

Group C possible human carcinogen 

based on an increase in the incidence of 

hepatocellular adenomas, carcinomas, 

and combined adenomas/carcinomas in 

male and female mice. Mutagenicity 

data did not demonstrate any evidence 

of mutagenic potential for tebuconazole. 

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 can be found at http:// 

www.regulations.gov in document 

entitled ‘‘Tebuconazole: Human Health 

Risk Assessment to harmonize 

Tolerances of Tebuconazole in/on Oats 

and Wheat with Canada,’’ pp. 32–37 in 

docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011– 

0120. 

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 tebuconazole used for 

human risk assessment is shown in the 

Table of this unit. 

TABLE—SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSES AND ENDPOINTS FOR TEBUCONAZOLE 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 (General population including infants 

and children) (Females 

13–50 years of age).

LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day ....

UF = 300 

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

FQPA (UFL) = 3x 

Acute RfD = 0.029 mg/kg/ 

day.

aPAD = 0.029 mg/kg/day 

Developmental Neurotoxicity Study—Rat. LOAEL = 

8.8 mg/kg/day based on decreases in body weights, 

absolute brain weights, brain measurements and 

motor activity in offspring. 

Chronic dietary (All populations).LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day ....

UF = 300 

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

FQPA (UFL) = 3x 

Chronic RfD = 0.029 mg/ 

kg/day.

cPAD = 0.029 mg/kg/day 

Developmental Neurotoxicity Study—Rat. 

LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day based on decreases in body 

weights, absolute brain weights, brain measurements and motor activity in offspring. 

Incidental oral short-term/Intermediate term (1 to 30 

days/1 to 6 months).

LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day ....

UF = 300 

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

FQPA (UFL) = 3x 

Residential LOC for MOE 

= 300.

Developmental Neurotoxicity Study—Rat. LOAEL = 

8.8 mg/kg/day based on decreases in body weights, 

absolute brain weights, brain measurements and 

motor activity in offspring. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 54129 

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

ASSESSMENT—Continued 

Exposure/scenario Point of departure and 

uncertainty/safety factors 

RfD, PAD, LOC for risk 

assessment Study and toxicological effects 

Dermal short-term/Intermediate term (1 to 30 

days/1 to 6 months).

LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day ....

UF = 300 

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

UFL = 3x 

DAF = 23.1% 

Residential LOC for MOE 

= 300.

Developmental Neurotoxicity Study—Rat. 

LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day based on decreases in body 

weights, absolute brain weights, brain measurements and motor activity in offspring. 

Inhalation short-term/Intermediate term (1 to 30 

days/1 to 6 months).

LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day ....

UF = 300 

UFA = 10x 

UFH = 10x 

UFL = 3x 

Inhalation and oral absorption are assumed to be 

equivalent. 

Residential LOC for MOE 

= 300.

Developmental Neurotoxicity Study—Rat. 

LOAEL = 8.8 mg/kg/day based on decreases in body 

weights, absolute brain weights, brain measurements and motor activity in offspring. 

Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation).Classification: Group C—possible human carcinogen based on statistically significant increase in the incidence of 

hepatocellular adenoma, carcinoma, and combined adenoma/carcinomas in both sexes of NMRI mice. Considering that there was no evidence of carcinogenicity in rats, there was no evidence of genotoxicity for 

tebuconazole, and tumors were only seen at a high and excessively toxic dose in mice, EPA concluded that the 

chronic RfD would be protective of any potential carcinogenic effect. The chronic RfD value is 0.029 mg/kg/day 

which is approximately 9,600 fold lower than the dose that would induce liver tumors (279 mg/kg/day). 

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

(intraspecies). UFL = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL. UFS = use of a short-term study for long-term risk assessment. UFDB = to account 

for the absence of data or other data deficiency. FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = 

acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern. DAF = dermal absorption factor. 

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. 

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, anticipated residues for 

bananas, grapes, raisins, nectarines, 

peaches, and peanut butter were derived 

using the 2002–2006 USDA Pesticide 

Data Program (PDP) monitoring data. 

Anticipated residues for all other 

registered food commodities were based 

on field trial data. For uses associated 

with PP 0F7792, 100 percent crop 

treated (PCT) was assumed. DEEM (ver. 

7.81) default processing factors were 

assumed for processed commodities 

associated with petition 0F7792. For 

several other uses EPA used PCT data as 

specified in Unit III.C.1.iv. 

ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting 

the chronic dietary exposure 

assessment, EPA used the same data 

sources as stated in Unit III. C. 1. i. for 

acute exposure. 

iii. Cancer. As explained in Unit 

III.B., the chronic risk assessment is 

considered to be protective of any 

cancer effects; therefore, a separate 

quantitative cancer dietary risk 

assessment was not conducted. 

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. 

The Agency estimated the PCT for 

existing uses as follows: 

Grapes: 25% acute assessment, 15% 

chronic assessment; grape, raisin: 25% 

acute assessment, 15% chronic 

assessment; nectarine: 25% acute 

assessment, 20% chronic assessment; 

peach: 20% acute assessment, 15% 

chronic assessment; and peanuts: 45% 

acute assessment, 15% chronic 

assessment. 

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 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
54130 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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%. 

The Agency also used PCT 

information for tebuconazole on the 

following recently approved uses: 

Apples, apricots, cherries (preharvest), 

sweetcorn, hops, plums, and turnips. 

The PCT for each crop is as follows: 

Apples, acute assessment 44%, chronic 

assessment 41%; Apricots, acute 

assessment 56%, chronic assessment 

43%; Cherries, preharvest, acute 

assessment 42%, chronic assessment 

37%; Corn, sweet, acute assessment 

22%, chronic assessment 14%; Hops, 

acute assessment 64%, chronic 

assessment 64%; Plum, acute 

assessment 26%, chronic assessment 

24%; Turnip, acute assessment 68%, 

chronic assessment 44%. EPA estimates 

PCT for a new pesticide use by 

assuming that its actual PCT during the 

initial five years of use on a specific use 

site will not exceed the recent PCT of 

the market leader (i.e. ,the one with the 

greatest PCT) on that site. An average 

market leader PCT, based on three 

recent surveys of pesticide usage, if 

available, is used for chronic risk 

assessment, while the maximum PCT 

from the same three recent surveys, if 

available, is used for acute risk 

assessment. The average and maximum 

market leader PCTs may each be based 

on one or two surveys if three are not 

available. Comparisons are only made 

among pesticides of the same pesticide 

type (i.e., the leading fungicide on the 

use site is selected for comparison with 

the new fungicide). The market leader 

PCTs used to determine the average and 

the maximum may be each for the same 

pesticide or for different pesticides 

since the same or different pesticides 

may dominate for each year. Typically, 

EPA uses USDA/NASS as the source for 

raw PCT data because it is publicly 

available. When a specific use site is not 

surveyed by USDA/NASS, EPA uses 

other sources including proprietary 

data. 

An estimated PCT, based on the 

average PCT of the market leaders, is 

appropriate for use in chronic dietary 

risk assessment, and an estimated 

projected percent crop treated (PPCT), 

based on the maximum PCT of the 

market leaders, is appropriate for use in 

acute dietary risk assessment. This 

method of estimating PCTs for a new 

use of a registered pesticide or a new 

pesticide produces high-end estimates 

that are unlikely, in most cases, to be 

exceeded during the initial five years of 

actual use. Predominant factors that 

bear on whether the PCTs could be 

exceeded may include PCTs of similar 

chemistries, pests controlled by 

alternatives, pest prevalence in the 

market and other factors. Based on these 

factors, EPA has adjusted upward the 

estimates for three crops: Cherries postharvest, hops and turnip greens. 

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. 

Surface water estimated drinking 

water concentrations (EDWCs) resulting 

from the Pesticide Root Zone Model/ 

Exposure Analysis Modeling System 

(PRZM/EXAMS) were used in the 

dietary assessment, since they were 

higher than the EDWCs resulting from 

the Screening Concentration in Ground 

Water (SCI GROW). A distribution of 30- 

year daily surface water concentrations 

was estimated for the EDWCs of 

tebuconazole for acute exposures. The 

EDWC for chronic, noncancer exposure 

is estimated to be 59.0 μg/L for surface 

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 has currently registered 

uses that could result in residential 

exposures. Short-term dermal and 

inhalation exposures are possible for 

residential adult handlers mixing, 

loading, and applying tebuconazole 

products outdoors to ornamental plants. 

Short- and intermediate-term dermal 

postapplication exposures are also 

possible to golfers from treated golf turf 

and to adults and children from contact 

to treated wood structures. Children 

may also be exposed via the incidental 

oral route when playing on treated 

wood structures. Long-term exposure is 

not expected. As a result, risk 

assessments have been completed for 

residential handler scenarios as well as 

residential post-application scenarios. 

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 

triazoles (and more specifically, 

triazole-derivative fungicides). Although 

triazoles 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. In triazoleVerDate Mar<15>2010 15:18 Aug 30, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\31AUR1.SGM 31AUR1

erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 54131 

derivative fungicides, however, a 

variable pattern of toxicological 

responses is found: Some are 

hepatotoxic and hepatocarcinogenic in 

mice; some induce thyroid tumors in 

rats; and some induce developmental, 

reproductive, and neurological effects in 

rodents. Furthermore, the triazoles 

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 

triazole-derivative fungicides share 

common mechanisms of toxicity and 

EPA is not following a cumulative risk 

approach based on a common 

mechanism of toxicity for the triazolederivative fungicides. 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. 

However, the triazole-derivative 

fungicides can form the common 

metabolites 1,2,4-triazole and 

conjugated triazole metabolites. To 

support existing tolerances and to 

establish new tolerances for triazolederivative fungicides, 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-derivative 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 retained the 

additional 10X FQPA safety factor for 

the protection of infants and children. 

The assessment includes evaluations of 

risks for various subgroups, including 

those comprised of infants and children. 

The Agency’s complete risk assessment 

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

docket ID number 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’’. 

This document updates another EPA 

risk assessment on triazole-derived 

pesticides which can be found in the 

reregistration docket for propiconazole 

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

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2005–0497. 

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 pre- and/or 

postnatal susceptibility. 

3. Conclusion. The Agency has 

determined that reliable data show the 

safety of infants and children would be 

adequately protected if the FQPA SF 

were reduced to 3x for all potential 

exposure scenarios. The decision is 

based on the following findings: 

i. The toxicity database for 

tebuconazole is complete with the 

exception of an immunotoxicity study 

requirement under the new 40 CFR part 

158 guidelines for toxicity data. The 

available guideline studies do not 

suggest that tebuconazole directly 

targets the immune system. A peerreviewed developmental neurotoxicity/ 

immunotoxicity literature study found 

in high dose groups (60 mg/kg/day) 

increased spleen weights and alterations 

in splenic lymphocyte subpopulations. 

At the same dose there were no effects 

seen in the T-cell dependent antibody 

response to sheep red blood cells 

(SRBC) and natural killer (NK) cell 

activity indicating that tebuconazole did 

not alter the functional immune 

response in rats. Based on guideline and 

open literature, the overall weight of 

evidence suggests that tebuconazole 

does not directly target the immune 

system. The Agency does not believe 

that conducting a functional 

immunotoxicity study will result in a 

lower POD than currently used for 

overall risk assessment; therefore, a 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
54132 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

database uncertainty factor (UFDB) is 

not needed to account for the lack of the 

study. 

ii. 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. 

iii. A 3x FQPA safety factor is needed 

to address the failure to achieve a 

NOAEL in the developmental 

neurotoxicity (DNT) study. Reduction of 

the FQPA safety factor from 10x to 3x 

is based on a Benchmark Dose (BMD) 

analysis of the datasets relevant to the 

adverse offspring effects (decreased 

body weight, decreases in absolute brain 

weights, changes in brain morphometric 

parameters, and decreases in motor 

activity) seen at the LOAEL in the DNT 

study. The BMD analysis models or 

estimates the dose (BMD) associated 

with a specified measure or change (e.g. 

a dose representing a 10% change) of a 

biological effect over the control. All of 

the BMDLs (the lower limit of a onesided 95% confidence interval on the 

BMD) modeled successfully on 

statistically significant effects are 1–2x 

lower than the LOAEL. The results 

indicate that the use of the FQPA safety 

factor of 3x would not underestimate 

risk. Using a 3x FQPA safety factor in 

the risk assessment (8.8 mg/kg/day ÷ 3x 

= 2.9 mg/kg/day) is further supported by 

the NOAELs established in other studies 

in the tebuconazole toxicity database 

[i.e., 3 and 2.9 mg/kg/day, from a DNT 

study in mice and a chronic toxicity 

study in dogs, respectively (respective 

LOAELs 10 and 4.5 mg/kg/day)]. 

iv. There are no residual uncertainties 

identified in the exposure databases. 

Although the acute and chronic food 

exposure assessments are refined, EPA 

believes that the assessments are based 

on reliable data and will not 

underestimate exposure/risk. The 

drinking water estimates were derived 

from conservative screening models. 

The residential exposure assessment 

utilizes reasonable high-end variables 

set out in EPA’s Occupational/ 

Residential Exposure SOPs (Standard 

Operating Procedures). The aggregate 

assessment is based upon reasonable 

worst-case residential assumptions, and 

is also not likely to underestimate 

exposure/risk to any subpopulation, 

including those comprised of infants 

and children. 

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 33% of the 

aPAD for the U.S. population and 62% 

of the aPAD for the population group 

(children 3–5 years old) 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 8.8% of 

the cPAD for the U.S. population and 

16% of the cPAD for the most highly 

exposed population group (all infants (< 

1 year old). 

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 that the 

short-term aggregate MOE from dietary 

exposure (food + drinking water) and 

non-occupational/residential handler 

exposure for adults using a hose-end 

sprayer on ornamentals is 370. The 

short-term aggregate MOE from dietary 

exposure and exposure from golfing is 

1,900. The likelihood of a residential 

handler treating ornamentals with 

tebuconazole and then playing golf on a 

tebuconazole-treated course is 

considered low; therefore, each scenario 

is considered separately with 

background dietary exposure. The shortterm aggregate MOE to children from 

dietary exposure and exposure from 

wood surfaces treated at the above 

ground use rate is 470. The short-term 

aggregate MOE to children from dietary 

exposure and exposure to wood surfaces 

treated at the below ground use rate is 

220. The combined and aggregate MOEs 

for wood treated for below ground uses 

are lower than the target MOE (300) and 

thus indicate a potential risk of concern. 

However, the combined MOE for wood 

treated for above-ground uses is not 

lower than the target MOE, and 

therefore is not of concern. Exposure to 

above-ground wood is expected to more 

closely represent actual exposures to 

children. Frequency of exposures to 

above-ground wood should greatly 

exceed any exposures to below-ground 

wood, and exposures to below ground 

wood would be minimal, or negligible. 

It is unrealistic to expect a full duration 

of exposure to below ground wood. 

Therefore, EPA concludes that there is 

not a concern for short-term 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). 

Tebuconazole is currently registered for 

uses that could result in intermediateterm residential exposure, and the 

Agency has determined that it is 

appropriate to aggregate chronic 

exposure through food and water with 

intermediate-term residential exposures 

to tebuconazole. Since the POD, 

relevant exposure scenarios and 

exposure assumptions used for 

intermediate-term aggregate risk 

assessments are the same as those used 

for short-term aggregate risk 

assessments, the short-term aggregate 

risk assessments represent and are 

protective of both short and 

intermediate-term exposure durations. 

5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. 

population. As discussed in this unit, 

the chronic risk assessment is 

considered to be protective of any 

cancer effects; therefore, because the 

chronic risk assessment indicates 

exposure is lower than the cPAD, 

tebuconazole does not pose a cancer risk 

of concern. 

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 gas chromatography/ 

nitrogen phosphorous detector (GC/ 

NPD) and liquid chromatography/mass 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 169 / Wednesday, August 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 54133 

spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC/ 

MS/MS) methods are available for both 

collecting and enforcing tolerances for 

tebuconazole and its metabolites in 

plant commodities, livestock matrices 

and processing studies. The methods 

have been adequately validated by an 

independent laboratory in conjunction 

with a previous petition. 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 

Codex and Canada have established 

maximum residue limits (MRLs) for 

tebuconazole in/on a variety of plant 

and livestock commodities. The 

tolerance expression for tebuconazole is 

harmonized between U.S., Codex, and 

Canada. The proposed tolerances will 

harmonize established U.S. tolerances 

on oat and wheat with current Canadian 

MRLs. 

There are currently no Codex MRLs 

for wheat and oats. 

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For 

Tolerances 

The Agency concluded that residues 

of tebuconazole do not concentrate in 

wheat bran, flour or middlings, but do 

concentrate in shorts and germ (2.5X). 

As a result, a tolerance in/on wheat, 

shorts and wheat, germ, each at 0.20 

ppm (highest average field trial (HAFT) 

value = 0.08 ppm), is required. 

V. Conclusion 

Therefore, tolerances are established 

for residues of tebuconazole, in or on 

wheat, grain, and oat, grain at 0.15 ppm 

and wheat, shorts, and wheat, germ at 

0.20 ppm. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This final rule establishes tolerances 

under section 408(d) of FFDCA 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 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: August 17, 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 180.474, paragraph (a)(1) is 

amended by: 

■ i. Revising the introductory text; 

■ ii. Revising the entries for ‘‘oat, grain’’ 

and ‘‘wheat, grain’’ in the table; and 

■ iii. Alphabetically adding entries for 

‘‘wheat, shorts’’ and ‘‘wheat, germ’’ to 

the table. 

The amendments read as follows: 

§ 180.474 Tebuconazole; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * 

(1) Tolerances are established for 

residues of tebuconazole, alpha-[2-(4- 

chlorophenyl)ethyl]-alpha-(1,1- 

dimethylethyl)-1H-1,2,4-triazole-1- 

ethanol, including its metabolites and 

degradates, in or on the commodities in 

the table below. Compliance with the 

tolerance levels specified below is to be 

determined by measuring only 

tebuconazole [a-[2-(4-chlorophenyl) 

ethyl]-a-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-1H-1,2,4- 

triazole-1-ethanol], in or on the 

commodity. 

Commodity 

Parts 

per 

million 

* * * * * 

Oat, grain ...................................... 0.15 

Wheat, grain ................................. 0.15 

Wheat, shorts ............................... 0.20 

Wheat, germ ................................. 0.20 

* * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–22138 Filed 8–30–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES