Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 32443 

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) (Public Law 104–4). 

This action does not involve any 

technical standards that would require 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section 

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

VII. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register. This final rule is not 

a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: June 19, 2009. 

Steven Bradbury, 

Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. 

■ Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 180—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 

■ 2. Section 180.647 is added to read as 

follows: 

§ 180.647 d-Phenothrin; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. A tolerance of 0.01 parts 

per million is established for residues of 

the insecticide d-phenothrin in or on all 

food/feed crops following wide-area 

mosquito adulticide applications. 

(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. 

[Reserved] 

(c) Tolerances with regional 

registrations. [Reserved] 

(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. 

[Reserved] 

[FR Doc. E9–15937 Filed 7–7–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0478; FRL–8423–6] 

Pyrimethanil; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation replaces 

existing tolerances for residues of 

pyrimethanil on fruit, citrus, group 10 

postharvest; and fruit, stone, group 12, 

except cherry with tolerances for 

residues of pyrimethanil in or on fruit, 

citrus, group 10, except lemon, 

postharvest; fruit, stone, group 12; and 

lemon, preharvest and postharvest. 

Interregional Research Project Number 4 

(IR-4) requested these tolerances under 

the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 

Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective July 

8, 2009. Objections and requests for 

hearings must be received on or before 

September 8, 2009, 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–2008–0478. 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: 

Susan Stanton, Registration Division 

(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 305–5218; e-mail address: 

stanton.susan@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 Access Electronic Copies 

of this Document? 

In addition to accessing electronically 

available documents at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, you may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may 

also access a frequently updated 

electronic version of EPA’s tolerance 

regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through 

the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR 

cite at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr. 

To access the OPPTS Harmonized 

Guidelines referenced in this document, 

go directly to the guidelines at http://

www.epa.gpo/opptsfrs/home/

guidelin.htm. 

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing 

Request? 

Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, 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 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
32444 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

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–2008–0478 in the subject line on 

the first page of your submission. All 

requests must be in writing, and must be 

mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk 

as required by 40 CFR part 178 on or 

before September 8, 2009. 

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 that is described in 

ADDRESSES. Information not marked 

confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 

may be disclosed publicly by EPA 

without prior notice. Submit this copy, 

identified by docket ID number EPA– 

HQ–OPP–2008–0478, 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. Petition for Tolerance 

In the Federal Register of July 9, 2008 

(73 FR 39289) (FRL–8371–2), EPA 

issued a notice pursuant to section 

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

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

pesticide petition (PP 8E7353) by IR-4, 

500 College Road East, Suite 201W, 

Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition 

requested that 40 CFR 180.518 be 

amended by establishing tolerances for 

residues of the fungicide pyrimethanil, 

4,6-dimethyl-N-phenyl-2- 

pyrimidinamine, in or on fruit, citrus, 

(except lemon), group 10 (postharvest) 

at 10 parts per million (ppm); lemon at 

11 ppm; and fruit, stone, group 12 at 10 

ppm; and removing existing tolerances 

for residues of pyrimethanil on fruit, 

citrus, group 10 postharvest at 10 ppm; 

and fruit stone, group 12, except cherry 

at 3.0 ppm. That notice referenced a 

summary of the petition prepared by 

Bayer CropScience, the registrant, on 

behalf of IR-4, which is available to the 

public 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 made 

minor changes to the citrus commodity 

definitions. The reason for these 

changes 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 

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 the petitioned-for 

tolerances for residues of pyrimethanil 

on fruit, citrus, group 10, except lemon, 

postharvest at 11 ppm; fruit, stone, 

group 12 at 10 ppm; and lemon, 

preharvest and postharvest at 11 ppm. 

EPA’s assessment of exposures and risks 

associated with establishing tolerances 

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. 

Pyrimethanil is of low acute toxicity 

by the oral, inhalation, and dermal 

routes of exposure. It is slightly 

irritating to the eyes and non-irritating 

to the skin in rabbit studies. 

Pyrimethanil is not a dermal sensitizer. 

Subchronic and chronic repeated oral 

toxicity studies in rats, mice, and dogs 

primarily resulted in decreased body 

weight and body-weight gains, often 

accompanied by decreased food 

consumption. The major target organs in 

rats and mice were the liver and 

thyroid. In subchronic studies in rats 

and mice, liver toxicity was manifested 

as increased absolute and relative liver 

weights. Histopathological changes in 

the liver were primarily associated with 

increased evidence of hypertrophy in 

centrilobular hepatocytes. In a 

subchronic toxicity study in mice, 

increases in absolute thyroid weight 

were observed, associated with 

exfoliative necrosis and pigmentation of 

follicular cells. In a subchronic toxicity 

study in rats, thyroid effects were 

manifested as an increased incidence 

and severity of follicular epithelial 

hypertrophy and follicular epithelial 

brown pigment. 

EPA classified pyrimethanil as a 

Group C (possible human) carcinogen, 

based on an increased incidence of 

thyroid follicular cell tumors observed 

in the chronic/carcinogenicity study in 

rats. There was no evidence of 

carcinogenicity in mice; however, the 

dosing in this study was not considered 

to be adequate to assess the potential 

carcinogenicity. Therefore, EPA is 

requesting a repeat of the mouse 

carcinogenicity study. Based on the 

presence of thyroid tumors in rats, EPA 

has determined that a margin of 

exposure (MOE) approach is appropriate 

for quantification of risk. This 

determination is based on evidence that 

pyrimethanil appears to induce thyroid 

tumors through a disruption in the 

thyroid-pituitary status and thus may 

have a threshold for tumor 

development. This decision was 

supported by the weight of the 

evidence, considering the neoplastic, 

related nonneoplastic and/or hormonal 

effects in the male rat thyroid and liver. 

A point of departure (POD) of 17 

milligrams/kilograms/day (mg/kg/day), 

based on the thyroid precursor lesions 

is used for establishing the chronic 

population adjusted dose (cPAD) for 

pyrimethanil. The cPAD will be 

protective of any potential cancer and 

non-cancer effects from exposure to 

pyrimethanil. At this time, there is less 

concern for the lack of a repeat mouse 

carcinogenicity study, since no 

toxicologically significant effects were 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 32445 

noted up to the highest dose tested 

(HDT) (254 mg/kg/day) in the existing 

mouse study, and the new study will be 

tested at higher doses. Consequently 

EPA does not believe that the new study 

will yield a POD lower than the current 

POD (17 mg/kg/day) used for risk 

assessment. 

Signs of potential neurotoxicity 

(ataxia, decreased motor activity, 

decreased body temperature, decreased 

hind limb grip strength in males, and 

dilated pupils in females) were observed 

at the HDT (1,000 mg/kg/day) in the 

acute neurotoxicity study in rats. No 

signs of neurotoxicity were evident at 

doses up to 392 mg/kg/day in the 

subchronic neurotoxicity study in rats; 

and there was no evidence of 

neuropathology in either the acute or 

subchronic neurotoxicity study or in 

any of the subchronic and chronic 

toxicity studies in mice, rats and dogs. 

There was no quantitative or 

qualitative evidence of increased 

susceptibility of fetuses in the 

developmental toxicity studies in rats 

and rabbits or of offspring in the 2– 

generation reproduction toxicity study 

in rats. In the rat developmental toxicity 

study, maternal effects (decreased body 

weight and weight gain) and fetal effects 

(decreases in mean litter weight and 

mean fetal weight) were observed at the 

same dose. Similarly, in the rabbit 

developmental toxicity study, fetal 

effects (decreased body weight, weight 

gain, food consumption, and production 

and size of fecal pellets; increase in fetal 

runts; retarded ossification; 13 thoracic 

vertebrae and pairs of ribs; and deaths) 

occurred at a dose that produced similar 

maternal toxicity (decreased body 

weight, weight gain, food consumption, 

and production and size of fecal pellets, 

and deaths). There were no effects on 

fertility or reproduction in the 2– 

generation reproduction study in rats. In 

this study, adverse effects (decreased 

body weight/weight gain) also occurred 

at the same dose in parental animals 

and pups. 

Specific information on the studies 

received and the nature of the adverse 

effects caused by pyrimethanil 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 the document 

Pyrimethanil Human-Health Risk 

Assessment for Proposed Uses on Stone 

Fruits and Citrus Fruits, page 39 in 

docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2008– 

0478. 

B. Toxicological Endpoints 

For hazards that have a threshold 

below which there is no appreciable 

risk, a toxicological POD is identified as 

the basis for derivation of reference 

values for risk assessment. The POD 

may be defined as the highest dose at 

which no adverse effects are observed 

(the NOAEL) in the toxicology study 

identified as appropriate for use in risk 

assessment. However, if a NOAEL 

cannot be determined, the lowest dose 

at which adverse effects of concern are 

identified (the LOAEL) or a benchmark 

dose (BMD) approach is sometimes used 

for risk assessment. Uncertainty/safety 

factors (UFs) are used in conjunction 

with the POD to take into account 

uncertainties inherent in the 

extrapolation from laboratory animal 

data to humans and in the variations in 

sensitivity among members of the 

human population as well as other 

unknowns. Safety is assessed for acute 

and chronic dietary risks by comparing 

aggregate food and water exposure to 

the pesticide to the acute population 

adjusted dose (aPAD) and cPAD. The 

aPAD and cPAD are calculated by 

dividing the POD by all applicable UFs. 

Aggregate short-, intermediate-, and 

chronic-term risks are evaluated by 

comparing food, water, and residential 

exposure to the POD to ensure that the 

MOE called for by the product of all 

applicable UFs is not exceeded. This 

latter value is referred to as the level of 

concern (LOC). 

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 greater than that 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 pyrimethanil used for 

human risk assessment can be found at 

http://www.regulations.gov in the 

document Pyrimethanil Human-Health 

Risk Assessment for Proposed Uses on 

Stone Fruits and Citrus Fruits, page 20 

in docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2008–0478. 

C. Exposure Assessment 

1. Dietary exposure from food and 

feed uses. In evaluating dietary 

exposure to pyrimethanil, EPA 

considered exposure under the 

petitioned-for tolerances as well as all 

existing pyrimethanil tolerances in 40 

CFR 180.518. EPA assessed dietary 

exposures from pyrimethanil 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. EPA identified such effects 

for the general population (decreased 

motor activity, ataxia, decreased body 

temperature, hind limb grip strength, 

and dilated pupils observed in the acute 

neurotoxicity study) and for females 13 

to 49 years old (increase in fetuses with 

13 thoracic vertebrae and 13 pairs of 

ribs observed in the rabbit 

developmental toxicity study that are 

presumed to occur after a single 

exposure). The aPAD for the general 

population has been established at 1 

mg/kg/day; whereas, the aPAD for 

females 13 to 49 years old is lower (0.45 

mg/kg/day) due to the more sensitive 

endpoint on which it is based. 

In estimating acute dietary exposure, 

EPA used food consumption 

information from the United States 

Department of Agriculture (USDA) 

1994–1996 and 1998 Nationwide 

Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by 

Individuals (CSFII). As to residue levels 

in food, EPA assumed that pyrimethanil 

residues are present in all commodities 

at tolerance levels and that 100% of all 

crops are treated. 

ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting 

the chronic dietary exposure assessment 

EPA used the food consumption data 

from the USDA 1994–1996 and 1998 

CSFII. As to residue levels in food, EPA 

assumed that pyrimethanil residues are 

present in all commodities at tolerance 

levels and that 100% of all crops are 

treated. 

iii. Cancer. EPA classified 

pyrimethanil as a Group C (possible 

human) carcinogen but determined that 

the chronic dietary risk assessment 

based on the cPAD would be protective 

of any potential cancer effects. 

Therefore, a separate exposure 

assessment to evaluate cancer risk is 

unnecessary. The weight of the evidence 

supporting this determination is 

discussed in unit III.A. 

iv. Anticipated residue and percent 

crop treated (PCT) information. EPA did 

not use anticipated residue or PCT 

information in the dietary assessment 

for pyrimethanil. Tolerance level 

residues and 100 PCT were assumed for 

all food commodities. 

2. Dietary exposure from drinking 

water. The Agency used screening level 

water exposure models in the dietary 

exposure analysis and risk assessment 

for pyrimethanil in drinking water. 

These simulation models take into 

account data on the physical, chemical, 

and fate/transport characteristics of 

pyrimethanil. Further information 

regarding EPA drinking water models 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
32446 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

used in pesticide exposure assessment 

can be found at http://www.epa.gov/

oppefed1/models/water/index.htm. 

Based on Pesticide Root Zone Model/ 

Exposure Analysis Modeling System 

(PRZM/EXAMS) and Screening 

Concentration in Ground Water (SCIGROW) models, the estimated drinking 

water concentrations (EDWCs) of 

pyrimethanil for acute exposures are 

estimated to be 37.8 parts per billion 

(ppb) for surface water and 4.8 ppb for 

ground water. EDWCs of pyrimethanil 

for chronic exposures for non-cancer 

assessments are estimated to be 5.1 ppb 

for surface water and 4.8 ppb for ground 

water. 

Modeled estimates of drinking water 

concentrations were directly entered 

into the dietary exposure model. For 

acute dietary risk assessment, the water 

concentration value of 37.8 ppb was 

used to assess the contribution to 

drinking water. For chronic dietary risk 

assessment, the water concentration of 

value 5.1 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). 

Pyrimethanil is not registered for any 

specific use patterns that would result 

in residential exposure. 

4. Cumulative effects from substances 

with a common mechanism of toxicity. 

Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA 

requires that, when considering whether 

to establish, modify, or revoke a 

tolerance, the Agency consider 

‘‘available information’’ concerning the 

cumulative effects of a particular 

pesticide’s residues and ‘‘other 

substances that have a common 

mechanism of toxicity.’’ 

EPA has not found pyrimethanil to 

share a common mechanism of toxicity 

with any other substances, and 

pyrimethanil does not appear to 

produce a toxic metabolite produced by 

other substances. For the purposes of 

this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has 

assumed that pyrimethanil does not 

have a common mechanism of toxicity 

with other substances. For information 

regarding EPA’s efforts to determine 

which chemicals have a common 

mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate 

the cumulative effects of such 

chemicals, see EPA’s website at http:// 

www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative. 

D. Safety Factor for Infants and 

Children 

1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(c) of 

FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply 

an additional tenfold (10X) margin of 

safety for infants and children in the 

case of threshold effects to account for 

prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the 

completeness of the database on toxicity 

and exposure unless EPA determines 

based on reliable data that a different 

margin of safety will be safe for infants 

and children. This additional margin of 

safety is commonly referred to as the 

Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 

(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 prenatal and postnatal toxicology 

database for pyrimethanil includes rat 

and rabbit developmental toxicity 

studies and a 2–generation reproduction 

toxicity study in rats. As discussed in 

unit III.A., there was no evidence of 

increased quantitative or qualitative 

susceptibility of fetuses or offspring 

following exposure to pyrimethanil in 

these studies. 

3. Conclusion. EPA has determined 

that reliable data show the safety of 

infants and children would be 

adequately protected if the FQPA SF 

were reduced to 1X. That decision is 

based on the following findings: 

i. The toxicity database for 

pyrimethanil is adequate to assess the 

prenatal and postnatal toxicity of 

pyrimethanil. In accordance with 40 

CFR part 158’s toxicological data 

requirements, an immunotoxicity 

testing study (OPPTS Guideline 

870.7800) is required for pyrimethanil. 

The evidence for immunotoxicity in the 

existing database is limited to a slight 

decrease in thymus weight observed at 

the HDT (529 mg/kg/day) in the 

subchronic study in rats. There were no 

corroborative histopathological findings 

noted in the thymus in this study, and 

there were no effects on the thymus in 

the chronic/carcinogenicity study in rats 

at doses up to and including 221 mg/kg/ 

day or in any other study with 

pyrimethanil. Since the observed 

thymus weight increase is an isolated 

finding, EPA does not believe that 

conducting immunotoxicity testing will 

result in a POD lower than the POD 

already selected for evaluating chronic 

exposures to pyrimethanil (17 mg/kg/ 

day), and an additional database UF is 

not needed to account for potential 

immunotoxicity. 

ii. Although there were signs of 

potential neurotoxicity (ataxia, 

decreased motor activity, decreased 

body temperature, decreased hind limb 

grip strength in males, and dilated 

pupils in females) observed at the HDT 

(1,000 mg/kg/day) in the acute 

neurotoxicity study, there were no signs 

of neurotoxicity at doses up to 392 mg/ 

kg/day in the subchronic neurotoxicity 

study; and there was no evidence of 

neuropathology in either the acute or 

subchronic neurotoxicity study or in 

any of the subchronic and chronic 

toxicity studies in mice, rats and dogs. 

Based on these findings, EPA has 

determined that there is no need for a 

developmental neurotoxicity study or 

additional UFs to account for 

neurotoxicity. 

iii. There is no evidence that 

pyrimethanil results in increased 

susceptibility in in utero rats or rabbits 

in the prenatal developmental studies or 

in offspring in the 2–generation 

reproduction study. There are no 

residual uncertainties for prenatal and/ 

or postnatal toxicity. 

iv. There are no residual uncertainties 

identified in the exposure databases. 

The dietary food exposure assessments 

were performed based on 100 PCT and 

tolerance-level residues. EPA made 

conservative (protective) assumptions in 

the ground and surface water modeling 

used to assess exposure to pyrimethanil 

in drinking water. Pyrimethanil is not 

registered for any uses that would result 

in residential exposures to the pesticide. 

These assessments will not 

underestimate the exposure and risks 

posed by pyrimethanil. 

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of 

Safety 

EPA determines whether acute and 

chronic pesticide exposures are safe by 

comparing aggregate exposure estimates 

to the aPAD and cPAD. The aPAD and 

cPAD represent the highest safe 

exposures, taking into account all 

appropriate SFs. EPA calculates the 

aPAD and cPAD by dividing the POD by 

all applicable UFs. For linear cancer 

risks, EPA calculates the probability of 

additional cancer cases 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 POD to 

ensure that the MOE called for by the 

product of all applicable UFs is not 

exceeded. 

1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk 

assessment takes into account exposure 

estimates from acute dietary 

consumption of food and drinking 

water. Using the exposure assumptions 

discussed in this unit for acute 

exposure, EPA performed two different 

acute risk assessments–one focusing on 

females 13 to 49 years old and designed 

to protect against prenatal effects and 

the other focusing on acute effects 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 32447 

relevant to all other population groups. 

For females 13 to 49 years old, the acute 

dietary exposure to pyrimethanil from 

food and water will occupy 13% of the 

aPAD addressing prenatal effects. As to 

acute effects other than prenatal effects, 

the acute dietary exposure to 

pyrimethanil from food and water will 

occupy 35% of the aPAD for infants less 

than 1–year old, the population group 

with the highest estimated acute dietary 

exposure to pyrimethanil. 

2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure 

assumptions described in this unit for 

chronic exposure, EPA has concluded 

that chronic exposure to pyrimethanil 

from food and water will utilize 63% of 

the cPAD for children 1 to 2 years old, 

the population group receiving the 

greatest exposure. There are no 

residential uses for pyrimethanil. 

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). Pyrimethanil is not 

registered for any use patterns that 

would result in residential exposure. 

Therefore, the short-term aggregate risk 

is the sum of the risk from exposure to 

pyrimethanil through food and water 

and will not be greater than the chronic 

aggregate risk. 

4. Intermediate-term risk. 

Intermediate-term aggregate exposure 

takes into account intermediate-term 

residential exposure plus chronic 

exposure to food and water (considered 

to be a background exposure level). 

Pyrimethanil is not registered for any 

use patterns that would result in 

intermediate-term residential exposure. 

Therefore, the intermediate-term 

aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from 

exposure to pyrimethanil through food 

and water, which has already been 

addressed, and will not be greater than 

the chronic aggregate risk. 

5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. 

population. The Agency has determined 

that the chronic risk assessment based 

on the established cPAD is protective of 

potential cancer effects from exposure to 

pyrimethanil. Based on the results of the 

chronic risk assessment discussed in 

Unit III.E.2. EPA concludes that 

pyrimethanil is not expected to pose a 

cancer risk. 

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 pyrimethanil 

residues. 

IV. Other Considerations 

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology 

Adequate enforcement methodology 

(High Performance Liquid 

Chromatography (HPLC)) 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 

Codex maximum residue limits 

(MRLs) have been established for 

pyrimethanil per se in/on plant 

commodities associated with this 

petition, including citrus fruit at 7 ppm 

(postharvest); cherry (postharvest), 

peach and nectarine at 4 ppm; apricot 

at 3 ppm; and plum at 2 ppm. Due to 

differences in application rates and use 

patterns, harmonization of U.S. 

tolerances with the lower Codex MRLs 

is not possible at this time. 

C. Revisions to Petitioned-For 

Tolerances 

IR-4 petitioned for tolerances for 

residues of pyrimethanil on ‘‘fruit, 

citrus, (except lemon), group 10, 

(postharvest)’’ and on ‘‘lemon.’’ EPA 

revised the group tolerance to read 

‘‘fruit, citrus, group 10, except lemon, 

postharvest’’ to agree with the accepted 

nomenclature in the Agency’s Food and 

Feed Vocabulary Database. The 

tolerance for lemon was revised to read 

‘‘lemon, preharvest and postharvest’’ to 

comply with the regulation at 40 CFR 

180.1(h), which requires EPA to specify 

those tolerances intended to cover 

postharvest use of a pesticide. 

V. Conclusion 

Therefore, tolerances are established 

for residues of pyrimethanil, 4,6- 

dimethyl-N-phenyl-2-pyrimidinamine, 

in or on fruit, citrus, group 10, except 

lemon, postharvest at 10 ppm; fruit, 

stone, group 12 at 10 ppm; and lemon, 

preharvest and postharvest at 11 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) (Public Law 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 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES
32448 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 8, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register. This final rule is not 

a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: June 26, 2009. 

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. The table in paragraph (a)(1) of 

§ 180.518 is amended by removing the 

commodities ‘‘Fruit, citrus, group 10 

postharvest’’ and ‘‘Fruit, stone, group 

12, except cherry’’ and alphabetically 

adding the following commodities to 

read as follows: 

§ 180.518 Pyrimethanil; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

*****

Fruit, citrus, group 10, except 

lemon, postharvest ................ 10 

*****

Fruit, stone, group 12 ............... 10 

*****

Lemon, preharvest and 

postharvest ............................ 11 

*****

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E9–15942 Filed 7–7–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0731; FRL–8423–5] 

Cyazofamid; Pesticide Tolerances 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes 

tolerances for combined residues of 

cyazofamid and its metabolite, CCIM, 

expressed as cyazofamid in or on 

fruiting vegetable group 8 and okra. 

Additionally, it establishes a tolerance 

with regional restrictions in or on grape. 

Finally, this regulation removes the 

established grape import and tomato 

tolerances, as a regional tolerance on 

grape and fruiting vegetable group 

tolerance replaces them, respectively. 

Interregional Research Project Number 4 

(IR-4) requested these tolerances under 

the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 

Act (FFDCA). 

DATES: This regulation is effective July 

8, 2009. Objections and requests for 

hearings must be received on or before 

September 8, 2009, 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–2008–0731. 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: 

Laura Nollen, Registration Division 

(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 305–7390; e-mail address: 

nollen.laura@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 Access Electronic Copies 

of this Document? 

In addition to accessing electronically 

available documents at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, you may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr. You may 

also access a frequently updated 

electronic version of EPA’s tolerance 

regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through 

the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR 

cite at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr. 

To access the OPPTS Harmonized 

Guidelines referenced in this document, 

go directly to the guidelines at http://

www.epa.gpo/opptsfrs/home/

guidelin.htm. 

C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing 

Request? 

Under section 408(g) of FFDCA, 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 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with RULES