Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-0306-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Thiamethoxam; Pesticide Tolerances
Posted Date: 2003-09-17T04:00Z

54386
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
180
/
Wednesday,
September
17,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
levels
of
government,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13132,
entitled
Federalism(
64
FR
43255,
August
10,
1999).
Executive
Order
13132
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
State
and
local
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
federalism
implications.''
``
Policies
that
have
federalism
implications''
is
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government.''
This
final
rule
directly
regulates
growers,
food
processors,
food
handlers
and
food
retailers,
not
States.
This
action
does
not
alter
the
relationships
or
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
established
by
Congress
in
the
preemption
provisions
of
section
408(
n)(
4)
of
the
FFDCA.
For
these
same
reasons,
the
Agency
has
determined
that
this
rule
does
not
have
any
``
tribal
implications''
as
described
in
Executive
Order
13175,
entitled
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments
(
65
FR
67249,
November
6,
2000).
Executive
Order
13175,
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
tribal
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
tribal
implications.''
``
Policies
that
have
tribal
implications''
is
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
one
or
more
Indian
tribes,
on
the
relationship
between
the
Federal
Government
and
the
Indian
tribes,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
between
the
Federal
Government
and
Indian
tribes.''
This
rule
will
not
have
substantial
direct
effects
on
tribal
governments,
on
the
relationship
between
the
Federal
Government
and
Indian
tribes,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
between
the
Federal
Government
and
Indian
tribes,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13175.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13175
does
not
apply
to
this
rule.

VIII.
Congressional
Review
Act
The
Congressional
Review
Act,
5
U.
S.
C.
801
et
seq.,
as
added
by
the
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
of
1996,
generally
provides
that
before
a
rule
may
take
effect,
the
agency
promulgating
the
rule
must
submit
a
rule
report,
which
includes
a
copy
of
the
rule,
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:
September
4,
2003.
James
Jones,
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),
346(
a)
and
371.


2.
Section
180.591
is
added
to
read
as
follows:

§
180.591
Trifloxysulfuron;
tolerances
for
residues
(
a)
General.
Tolerances
are
established
for
residues
of
the
herbicide
trifloxysulfuron,
N­[[(
4,6­
dimethoxy­
2­
pyrimidinyl)
amino]
carbonyl]­
3­(
2,2,2­
trifluoroethoxy)­
2­
pyridinesulfonamide
in
or
on
the
following
raw
agricultural
commodities.

Commodity
Parts
per
million
Almond
.....................................................................................................................
0.02
Almond,
hulls
...........................................................................................................
0.01
Fruit,
citrus,
Group
10
..............................................................................................
0.03
Cotton,
undelinted
seed
...........................................................................................
0.05
Cotton,
gin
byproducts
.............................................................................................
1.0
Sugarcane
................................................................................................................
0.01
Tomato
.....................................................................................................................
0.01
(
b)
Section
18
emergency
exemptions.
[
Reserved]
(
c)
Tolerances
with
regional
registrations.
[
Reserved]
(
d)
Indirect
or
inadvertent
residues.
[
Reserved]
[
FR
Doc.
03
 
23428
Filed
9
 
16
 
03;
8:
45am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
S
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
180
[
OPP
 
2003
 
0306;
FRL
 
7327
 
5]

Thiamethoxam;
Pesticide
Tolerances
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Final
rule.

SUMMARY:
This
regulation
establishes
tolerances
for
combined
residues
of
thiamethoxam
and
its
metabolite
in
or
on
imported
coffee,
pecan,
stone
fruit,
succulent
bean,
and
sunflower.
Syngenta
Crop
Protection,
Inc.
and
the
Interregional
Research
Project
Number
4
(
IR­
4)
requested
these
tolerances
under
the
Federal
Food,
Drug,
and
Cosmetic
Act
(
FFDCA),
as
amended
by
the
Food
Quality
Protection
Act
(
FQPA)
of
1996.

DATES:
This
regulation
is
effective
September
17,
2003.
Objections
and
requests
for
hearings,
identified
by
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0306,
must
be
received
on
or
before
November
17,
2003.
ADDRESSES:
Written
objections
and
hearing
requests
may
be
submitted
electronically,
by
mail,
or
through
hand
delivery/
courier.
Follow
the
detailed
instructions
as
provided
in
Unit
VI.
of
the
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Dani
Daniel,
Registration
Division
(
7505C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001;
telephone
number:
(
703)
305
 
5409;
e­
mail
address:
daniel.
dani@
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
VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
16:
05
Sep
16,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00060
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
17SER1.
SGM
17SER1
54387
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
180
/
Wednesday,
September
17,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
producer,
food
manufacturer,
or
pesticide
manufacturer.
Potentially
affected
entities
may
include,
but
are
not
limited
to:
 
Crop
production
(
NAICS
111)
 
Animal
production
(
NAICS
112)
 
Food
manufacturing
(
NAICS
311)
 
Pesticide
manufacturing
(
NAICS
32532)
This
listing
is
not
intended
to
be
exhaustive,
but
rather
provides
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
Copies
of
this
Document
and
Other
Related
Information?
1.
Docket.
EPA
has
established
an
official
public
docket
for
this
action
under
docket
identification
(
ID)
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0306.
The
official
public
docket
consists
of
the
documents
specifically
referenced
in
this
action,
any
public
comments
received,
and
other
information
related
to
this
action.
Although
a
part
of
the
official
docket,
the
public
docket
does
not
include
Confidential
Business
Information
(
CBI)
or
other
information
whose
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
The
official
public
docket
is
the
collection
of
materials
that
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
Public
Information
and
Records
Integrity
Branch
(
PIRIB),
Rm.
119,
Crystal
Mall
#
2,
1921
Jefferson
Davis
Hwy.,
Arlington,
VA.
This
docket
facility
is
open
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.
The
docket
telephone
number
is
(
703)
305
 
5805.
2.
Electronic
access.
You
may
access
this
Federal
Register
document
electronically
through
the
EPA
Internet
under
the
``
Federal
Register''
listings
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
fedrgstr/.
A
frequently
updated
electronic
version
of
40
CFR
part
180
is
available
at
http://
www.
access.
gpo.
gov/
nara/
cfr/
cfrhtml_
00/
Title_
40/
40cfr180_
00.
html/,
a
beta
site
currently
under
development.
An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EPA's
electronic
public
docket
and
comment
system,
EPA
Dockets.
You
may
use
EPA
Dockets
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket/
to
submit
or
view
public
comments,
access
the
index
listing
of
the
contents
of
the
official
public
docket,
and
to
access
those
documents
in
the
public
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Although
not
all
docket
materials
may
be
available
electronically,
you
may
still
access
any
of
the
publicly
available
docket
materials
through
the
docket
facility
identified
in
Unit
I.
B.
1.
Once
in
the
system,
select
``
search,''
then
key
in
the
appropriate
docket
ID
number.

II.
Background
and
Statutory
Findings
In
the
Federal
Register
of
April
2,
2003
(
68
FR
16040)
(
FRL
 
7298
 
7),
EPA
issued
a
notice
pursuant
to
section
408
of
FFDCA,
21
U.
S.
C.
346a,
as
amended
by
FQPA
(
Pub.
L.
104
 
170),
announcing
the
filing
of
pesticide
petitions
(
3E06524,
2E06505,
2E06508,
1E06349,
and
0F6142)
by
IR­
4,
681
U.
S.
Highway
#
1
South,
North
Bunswick,
NJ
08902
 
3390
and
Syngenta
Crop
Protection,
Inc.,
P.
O.
Box
18300,
Greensboro,
NC
27419
 
8300.
That
notice
included
a
summary
on
the
petitions
prepared
by
Syngenta
Crop
Protection,
Inc.,
the
registrant.
There
were
no
comments
received
in
response
to
the
notices
of
filing.
The
petitions
requested
that
40
CFR
180.565
be
amended
by
establishing
tolerances
for
the
combined
residues
of
the
insecticide
thiamethoxam,
3­[(
2­
chloro­
5­
thiazolyl)
methyl]
tetrahydro­
5­
methyl­
N­
nitro­
4H­
1,3,5­
oxadiazin­
4­
imine
and
its
metabolite
(
N­(
2­
chlorothiazol
5­
ylmethyl)­
N'­
methyl­
N'­
nitroguanidine
in
or
on
imported
coffee
at
0.05
parts
per
million
(
ppm)
(
1E6349),
pecan
at
0.02
ppm
(
0F6142),
stone
fruit
group
12
at
0.5
ppm
(
2E6505),
succulent
bean
at
0.02
ppm
(
2E6508),
and
sunflower
at
0.02
ppm
(
3E6524).
Section
408(
b)(
2)(
A)(
i)
of
the
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
the
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
the
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....''
EPA
performs
a
number
of
analyses
to
determine
the
risks
from
aggregate
exposure
to
pesticide
residues.
For
further
discussion
of
the
regulatory
requirements
of
section
408
of
the
FFDCA
and
a
complete
description
of
the
risk
assessment
process,
see
the
final
rule
on
Bifenthrin
Pesticide
Tolerances
November
26,
1997
(
62
FR
62961)
(
FRL
 
5754
 
7).

III.
Aggregate
Risk
Assessment
and
Determination
of
Safety
Consistent
with
section
408(
b)(
2)(
D)
of
the
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,
consistent
with
section
408(
b)(
2)
of
the
FFDCA,
for
tolerances
for
the
combined
residues
of
thiamethoxam
and
its
metabolite
on
imported
coffee
at
0.05
ppm,
pecan
at
0.02
ppm,
stone
fruit
group
12
at
0.5
ppm,
succulent
bean
at
0.02
ppm,
and
sunflower
at
0.02
ppm.
EPA's
assessment
of
exposures
and
risks
associated
with
establishing
the
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.
The
nature
of
the
toxic
effects
caused
by
thiamethoxam
as
well
as
the
no
observed
adverse
effect
level
(
NOAEL)
and
the
lowest
observed
adverse
effect
level
(
LOAEL)
from
the
toxicity
studies
reviewed
are
discussed
in
Unit
III.
A.
of
the
Federal
Register
of
November
1,
2002
(
67
FR
66561)
(
FRL
 
7279
 
6).

B.
Toxicological
Endpoints
The
dose
at
which
the
NOAEL
from
the
toxicology
study
identified
as
appropriate
for
use
in
risk
assessment
is
used
to
estimate
the
toxicological
level
of
concern
(
LOC).
However,
the
the
LOAEL
is
sometimes
used
for
risk
assessment
if
no
NOAEL
was
achieved
in
the
toxicology
study
selected.
An
uncertainty
factor
(
UF)
is
applied
to
reflect
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.
An
UF
of
100
is
routinely
used,
10X
to
account
for
interspecies
differences
and
10X
for
intraspecies
differences.

VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
16:
05
Sep
16,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00061
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
17SER1.
SGM
17SER1
54388
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
180
/
Wednesday,
September
17,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
For
dietary
risk
assessment
(
other
than
cancer)
the
Agency
uses
the
UF
to
calculate
an
acute
or
chronic
reference
dose
(
aRfD
or
cRfD)
where
the
RfD
is
equal
to
the
NOAEL
divided
by
the
appropriate
UF
(
RfD
=
NOAEL/
UF).
Where
an
additional
safety
factor
is
retained
due
to
concerns
unique
to
the
FQPA,
this
additional
factor
is
applied
to
the
RfD
by
dividing
the
RfD
by
such
additional
factor.
The
acute
or
chronic
Population
Adjusted
Dose
(
aPAD
or
cPAD)
is
a
modification
of
the
RfD
to
accommodate
this
type
of
FQPA
safty
factor.
For
non­
dietary
risk
assessments
(
other
than
cancer)
the
UF
is
used
to
determine
the
LOC.
For
example,
when
100
is
the
appropriate
UF
10X
to
account
for
interspecies
differences
and
10X
for
intraspecies
differences)
the
LOC
is
100.
To
estimate
risk,
a
ratio
of
the
NOAEL
to
exposures
(
margin
of
exposure
(
MOE)
=
NOAEL/
exposure)
is
calculated
and
compared
to
the
LOC.
The
linear
default
risk
methodology
(
Q*)
is
the
primary
method
currently
used
by
the
Agency
to
quantify
carcinogenic
risk.
The
Q*
approach
assumes
that
any
amount
of
exposure
will
lead
to
some
degree
of
cancer
risk.
A
Q*
is
calculated
and
used
to
estimate
risk
which
represents
a
probability
of
occurrence
of
additional
cancer
cases
(
e.
g.,
risk
is
expressed
as
1
x
10­
6
or
one
in
a
million).
Under
certain
specific
circumstances,
MOE
calculations
will
be
used
for
the
carcinogenic
risk
assessment.
In
this
non­
linear
approach,
a
``
point
of
departure''
is
identified
below
which
carcinogenic
effects
are
not
expected.
The
point
of
departure
is
typically
a
NOAEL
based
on
an
endpoint
related
to
cancer
effects
though
it
may
be
a
different
value
derived
from
the
dose
response
curve.
To
estimate
risk,
a
ratio
of
the
point
of
departure
to
exposure
(
MOEcancer
=
point
of
departure/
exposures)
is
calculated.
A
summary
of
the
toxicological
endpoints
for
thiamethoxam
used
for
human
risk
assessment
is
shown
in
the
following
Table
1:

TABLE
1.
 
SUMMARY
OF
TOXICOLOGICAL
DOSE
AND
ENDPOINTS
FOR
THIAMETHOXAM
FOR
USE
IN
HUMAN
RISK
ASSESSMENT
Exposure
Scenario
Dose
Used
in
Risk
Assessment
UF
FQPA
SF*
and
Level
of
Concern
for
Risk
Assessment
Study
and
Toxicological
Effects
Acute
dietary
(
general
population
including
infants
and
children)
NOAEL
=
100
mg/
kg/
day
UF
=
100
Acute
RfD
=
1
mg/
kg/
day
FQPA
SF
=
10
aPAD
=
acute
RfD
FQPA
SF
=
0.1
mg/
kg/
day
Acute
mammalian
neurotoxicity
study
in
the
rat
LOAEL
=
500
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
treatmentrelated
neurobehavioral
effects
observed
in
the
FOB
and
LMA
testing
(
drooped
palpebral
closure,
decreased
rectal
temperature
and
locomotor
activity,
increased
forelimb
grip
strength)

Chronic
dietary
(
all
populations
NOAEL
=
0.6
mg/
kg/
day
UF
=
100
Chronic
RfD
=
0.006
mg/
kg/
day
FQPA
SF
=
10
cPAD
=
chronic
RfD
FQPA
SF
=
0.0006
mg/
kg/
day
2­
Generation
reproduction
study
LOAEL
=
1.8
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
increased
incidence
and
severity
of
tubular
atrophy
in
testes
of
F1
generation
males
Oral
non­
dietary
(
all
durations
NOAEL
=
0.6
mg/
kg/
day
LOC
for
MOE
=
1,000
(
Residential)
2­
Generation
reproduction
study
LOAEL
=
1.8
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
increased
incidence
and
severity
of
tubular
atrophy
in
testes
of
F1
generation
males
Dermal
(
all
durations)
(
Residential)
Oral
study
NOAEL
=
0.6
mg/
kg/
day
(
dermal
absorption
rate
=
27%)
LOC
for
MOE
=
1,000
(
Residential)
LOC
for
MOE
=
100
(
Occupational)
2­
Generation
reproduction
study
LOAEL
=
1.8
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
increased
incidence
and
severity
of
tubular
atrophy
in
testes
of
F1
generation
males
Inhalation
(
all
durations)
(
Residential)
Oral
study
NOAEL
=
0.6
mg/
kg/
day
(
inhalation
absorption
rate
=
100%)
LOC
for
MOE
=
1,000
(
Residential)
LOC
for
MOE
=
100
(
Occupational)
2­
Generation
reproduction
study
LOAEL
=
1.8
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
increased
incidence
and
severity
of
tubular
atrophy
in
testes
of
F1
generation
males
Cancer
(
oral,
dermal,
inhalation
Likely
carcinogen
for
humans
based
on
increased
incidence
of
hepatocellular
adenomas
and
carcinomas
in
male
and
female
mice.
Quantification
of
risk
based
on
most
potent
unit
risk:
Male
mouse
liver
adenoma
and/
or
carcinoma
combined
tumor
rate.
The
upper
bound
estimate
of
unit
risk,
Q1*
(
mg/
kg/
day)­
1
is
3.77
x
10­
2
in
human
equivalents
*
The
reference
to
the
FQPA
safty
factor
refers
to
any
additional
safty
factor
retained
due
to
concerns
unique
to
the
FQPA.

C.
Exposure
Assessment
1.
Dietary
exposure
from
food
and
feed
uses.
Tolerances
have
been
established
(
40
CFR
180.565)
for
the
combined
residues
of
thiamethoxam
and
its
metabolite,
in
or
on
a
variety
of
raw
agricultural
commodities.
Tolerances
for
thiamethoxam
are
established
on
barley,
canola,
cotton,
sorghum,
wheat,
tuberous
and
corm
vegetables
crop
subgroup,
fruiting
vegetables
crop
group,
tomato
paste,
cucurbit
vegetables
crop
group,
pome
fruits
crop
group,
field
corn
forage,
field
corn
stover,
sweet
corn
stover,
field
corn
grain,
popcorn
grain,
and
sweet
corn
(
kernal
and
cob
with
husk
removed)
milk
and
the
meat
and
meat
by
products
of
cattle,
goats,
horses,
and
sheep.
Risk
assessments
were
conducted
by
EPA
to
assess
dietary
exposures
from
thiamethoxam
in
food
as
follows:
i.
Acute
exposure.
Acute
dietary
risk
assessments
are
performed
for
a
food­

VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
16:
05
Sep
16,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00062
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
17SER1.
SGM
17SER1
54389
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
180
/
Wednesday,
September
17,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
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.
The
Dietary
Exposure
Evaluation
Model
(
DEEMTM)
with
the
Food
Commodity
Intake
Database
(
FCID)
analysis
evaluated
the
individual
food
consumption
as
reported
by
respondents
in
the
U.
S.
Department
of
Agriculture
(
USDA)
1994
 
1996
and
1998
Nationwide
Continuing
Surveys
of
Food
Intake
by
Individuals
(
CSFII)
and
accumulated
exposure
to
the
chemical
for
each
commodity.
The
following
assumptions
were
made
for
the
acute
exposure
assessments:
The
residues
of
concern
for
the
acute
analysis
are
thiamethoxam
and
its
metabolite.
The
assessment
assumed
that
100%
of
the
registered
and
proposed
crops
were
treated
and
that
all
treated
crops
and
livestock
had
residues
of
concern
at
the
tolerance
level.
The
general
U.
S.
population
and
all
population
subgroups
have
exposure
and
risk
estimates
which
are
below
EPA's
LOC
(
i.
e.,
the
aPADs
are
all
below
100%).
The
most
highly
exposed
subgroup
is
children
1
to
2
years
of
age,
which
utilizes
3%
of
the
aPAD.
ii.
Chronic
exposure.
In
conducting
this
chronic
dietary
risk
assessment
the
DEEMTM
with
the
FCID
analysis
evaluated
the
individual
food
consumption
as
reported
by
respondents
in
the
USDA
1994
 
1996
and
1998
nationwide
CSFII
and
accumulated
exposure
to
the
chemical
for
each
commodity.
The
following
assumptions
were
made
for
the
chronic
exposure
assessments:
The
residues
of
concern
for
the
chronic
analysis
are
thiamethoxam
and
its
metabolite.
The
chronic
analysis
was
based
on
average
field
trial
residue
values
as
well
as
percent
crop
estimates.
The
general
U.
S.
population
and
all
population
subgroups
have
exposure
and
risk
estimates
which
are
below
EPA's
LOC
(
i.
e.,
the
cPADs
are
all
below
100%).
The
most
highly
exposed
subgroup
is
children
1
to
2
years
of
age,
which
utilizes
17%
of
the
cPAD.
iii.
Cancer.
The
residue
of
concern
for
the
cancer
analysis
is
thiamethoxam,
per
se.
The
residues
of
its
metabolite
were
removed
from
the
cancer
analysis
because
the
metabolite
was
found
to
be
``
not
likely
to
be
carcinogenic
to
humans''
when
it
was
evaluated
as
an
active
ingredient.
The
cancer
analysis
was
based
on
average
field
trial
residue
values
as
well
as
percent
crop
treated
(
PCT)
estimates.
The
estimated
cancer
risk
from
dietary
exposure
to
thiamethoxam
is
9.04
x
10
¥
7.
iv.
Anticipated
residue
and
PCT
information.
Section
408(
b)(
2)(
E)
of
the
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
chemicals
that
have
been
measured
in
food.
If
EPA
relies
on
such
information,
EPA
must
require
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.
Following
the
initial
data
submission,
EPA
is
authorized
to
require
similar
data
on
a
time
frame
it
deems
appropriate.
As
required
by
section
408(
b)(
2)(
E)
of
the
FFDCA,
EPA
will
issue
a
Data
Call­
In
for
information
relating
to
anticipated
residues
to
be
submitted
no
later
than
5
years
from
the
date
of
issuance
of
this
tolerance.
Section
408(
b)(
2)(
F)
of
the
FFDCA
states
that
the
Agency
may
use
data
on
the
actual
percent
of
food
treated
for
assessing
chronic
dietary
risk
only
if
the
Agency
can
make
the
following
findings:
Condition
1,
that
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
such
pesticide
residue;
condition
2,
that
the
exposure
estimate
does
not
underestimate
exposure
for
any
significant
subpopulation
group;
and
condition
3,
if
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
section
408(
b)(
2)(
F)
of
the
FFDCA,
EPA
may
require
registrants
to
submit
data
on
PCT.
The
Agency
used
PCT
information
in
the
following
Table
2:

TABLE
2.
 
THIAMETHOXAM
USES
AND
ESTIMATES
OF
CROP
TREATED
Commodity
Percent
Crop
Treated1
Apples
5
Casabas
44
Cherries
(
sweet)
37
Cherries
(
tart)
88
Coffee
100
Crabapples
53
Crenshaws
44
Cucumbers
5
Field
corn
6
Fruiting
vegetables
(
except
cucurbits
­
crop
group
8)
15
Lima
beans
(
fresh)
37
Lima
beans
(
processed)
52
Loquats
53
Melons
13
Peaches
45
VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
16:
05
Sep
16,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00063
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
17SER1.
SGM
17SER1
54390
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
180
/
Wednesday,
September
17,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
2.
 
THIAMETHOXAM
USES
AND
ESTIMATES
OF
CROP
TREATED
 
Continued
Commodity
Percent
Crop
Treated1
Pears
9
Pecans
38
Plums
60
Prunes
43
Pumpkins
44
Quinces
53
Snap
beans
(
fresh)
26
Snap
beans
(
processed)
38
Squash
44
Sunflower
25
Tuberous
and
corm
vegetables
­
crop
subgroup
1C
9
The
Agency
believes
that
the
three
conditions
listed
in
this
Unit
have
been
met.
With
respect
to
condition
1,
PCT
estimates
are
derived
from
Federal
and
private
market
survey
data,
which
are
reliable
and
have
a
valid
basis.
EPA
uses
a
weighted
average
PCT
for
chronic
dietary
exposure
estimates.
This
weighted
average
PCT
figure
is
derived
by
averaging
State­
level
data
for
a
period
of
up
to
10
years,
and
weighting
for
the
more
robust
and
recent
data.
A
weighted
average
of
the
PCT
reasonably
represents
a
person's
dietary
exposure
over
a
lifetime,
and
is
unlikely
to
underestimate
exposure
to
an
individual
because
of
the
fact
that
pesticide
use
patterns
(
both
regionally
and
nationally)
tend
to
change
continuously
over
time,
such
that
an
individual
is
unlikely
to
be
exposed
to
more
than
the
average
PCT
over
a
lifetime.
For
acute
dietary
exposure
estimates,
EPA
uses
an
estimated
maximum
PCT.
The
exposure
estimates
resulting
from
this
approach
reasonably
represent
the
highest
levels
to
which
an
individual
could
be
exposed,
and
are
unlikely
to
underestimate
an
individual's
acute
dietary
exposure.
The
Agency
is
reasonably
certain
that
the
percentage
of
the
food
treated
is
not
likely
to
be
an
underestimation.
As
to
conditions
2
and
3,
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
information
on
the
regional
consumption
of
food
to
which
thiamethoxam
may
be
applied
in
a
particular
area.
2.
Dietary
exposure
from
drinking
water.
The
Agency
lacks
sufficient
monitoring
exposure
data
to
complete
a
comprehensive
dietary
exposure
analysis
and
risk
assessment
for
thiamethoxam
in
drinking
water.
Because
the
Agency
does
not
have
comprehensive
monitoring
data,
drinking
water
concentration
estimates
are
made
by
reliance
on
simulation
or
modeling
taking
into
account
data
on
the
physical
characteristics
of
thiamethoxam.
The
Agency
uses
the
Generic
Estimated
Environmental
Concentration
(
GENEEC)
or
the
Pesticide
Root
Zone
Model/
Exposure
Analysis
Modeling
System
(
PRZM/
EXAMS)
to
estimate
pesticide
concentrations
in
surface
water
and
SCI­
GROW,
which
predicts
pesticide
concentrations
in
ground
water.
In
general,
EPA
will
use
GENEEC
(
a
Tier
1
model)
before
using
PRZM/
EXAMS
(
a
Tier
2
model)
for
a
screeninglevel
assessment
for
surface
water.
The
GENEEC
model
is
a
subset
of
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
model
that
uses
a
specific
highend
runoff
scenario
for
pesticides.
GENEEC
incorporates
a
farm
pond
scenario,
while
PRZM/
EXAMS
incorporate
an
index
reservoir
environment
in
place
of
the
previous
pond
scenario.
The
PRZM/
EXAMS
model
includes
a
percent
crop
area
factor
as
an
adjustment
to
account
for
the
maximum
percent
crop
coverage
within
a
watershed
or
drainage
basin.
None
of
these
models
include
consideration
of
the
impact
processing
(
mixing,
dilution,
or
treatment)
of
raw
water
for
distribution
as
drinking
water
would
likely
have
on
the
removal
of
pesticides
from
the
source
water.
The
primary
use
of
these
models
by
the
Agency
at
this
stage
is
to
provide
a
coarse
screen
for
sorting
out
pesticides
for
which
it
is
highly
unlikely
that
drinking
water
concentrations
would
ever
exceed
human
health
levels
of
concern.
Since
the
models
used
are
considered
to
be
screening
tools
in
the
risk
assessment
process,
the
Agency
does
not
use
estimated
environmental
concentrations
(
EECs)
from
these
models
to
quantify
drinking
water
exposure
and
risk
as
a
%
RfD
or
%
PAD.
Instead
drinking
water
levels
of
comparison
(
DWLOCs)
are
calculated
and
used
as
a
point
of
comparison
against
the
model
estimates
of
a
pesticide's
concentration
in
water.
DWLOCs
are
theoretical
upper
limits
on
a
pesticide's
concentration
in
drinking
water
in
light
of
total
aggregate
exposure
to
a
pesticide
in
food,
and
from
residential
uses.
Since
DWLOCs
address
total
aggregate
exposure
to
thiamethoxam,
they
are
further
discussed
in
the
aggregate
risk
sections
in
Unit
III.
E.
Based
on
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
and
SCIGROW
models,
the
estimated
environmental
concentrations
(
EECs)
of
thiamethoxam
for
acute
exposures
are
estimated
to
be
7.1
parts
per
billion
(
ppb)
for
surface
water
and
1.94
ppb
for
VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
16:
05
Sep
16,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00064
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
17SER1.
SGM
17SER1
54391
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
180
/
Wednesday,
September
17,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
ground
water.
The
EECs
for
chronic
non­
cancer
exposures
are
estimated
to
be
0.43
ppb
for
surface
water
and
1.94
ppb
for
ground
water.
The
EECs
for
cancer
exposures
are
estimated
to
be
0.13
ppb
for
surface
water
and
1.94
ppb
for
ground
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).
Thiamethoxam
is
not
registered
for
use
on
any
sites
that
would
result
in
residential
exposure.
4.
Cumulative
effects
from
substances
with
a
common
mechanism
of
toxicity.
Section
408(
b)(
2)(
D)(
v)
of
the
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
does
not
have,
at
this
time,
available
data
to
determine
whether
thiamethoxam
has
a
common
mechanism
of
toxicity
with
other
substances.
Unlike
other
pesticides
for
which
EPA
has
followed
a
cumulative
risk
approach
based
on
a
common
mechanism
of
toxicity,
EPA
has
not
made
a
common
mechanism
of
toxicity
finding
as
to
thiamethoxam
and
any
other
substances
and
thiamethoxam
does
not
appear
to
produce
a
toxic
metabolite
produced
by
other
substances.
For
the
purposes
of
this
tolerance
action,
therefore,
EPA
has
not
assumed
that
thiamethoxam
has
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
the
policy
statements
released
by
EPA's
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs
concerning
common
mechanism
determinations
and
procedures
for
cumulating
effects
from
substances
found
to
have
a
common
mechanism
on
EPA's
website
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
pesticides/
cumulative/.

D.
Safety
Factor
for
Infants
and
Children
1.
In
general.
Section
408
of
the
FFDCA
provides
that
EPA
shall
apply
an
additional
tenfold
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
data
base
on
toxicity
and
exposure
unless
EPA
determines
that
a
different
margin
of
safety
will
be
safe
for
infants
and
children.
Margins
of
safety
are
incorporated
into
EPA
risk
assessments
either
directly
through
use
of
a
MOE
analysis
or
through
using
uncertainty
(
safety)
factors
in
calculating
a
dose
level
that
poses
no
appreciable
risk
to
humans.
2.
Prenatal
and
postnatal
sensitivity.
The
developmental
toxicity
studies
indicated
no
quantitative
or
qualitative
evidence
of
increased
susceptibility
of
rat
or
rabbit
fetus
to
in
utero
exposure
based
on
the
fact
that
the
developmental
NOAELs
are
either
higher
than
or
equal
to
the
maternal
NOAELs.
However,
the
reproductive
studies
indicate
effects
in
males
rats
in
the
form
of
increased
incidence
and
severity
of
testicular
tubular
atrophy.
These
data
are
considered
to
be
evidence
of
increased
quantitative
susceptibility
for
male
pups
when
compared
to
the
parents.
3.
Conclusion.
There
is
a
complete
toxicity
data
base
for
thiamethoxam
and
exposure
data
are
complete
or
are
estimated
based
on
data
that
reasonably
accounts
for
potential
exposures.
EPA
determined
that
the
10X
safety
factor
to
protect
infants
and
children
should
be
retained.
The
10X
safety
factor
is
retained
based
on
the
following
factors:
Effects
on
endocrine
organs
observed
across
species;
the
significant
decrease
in
alanine
amino
transferase
levels
in
the
companion
animal
studies
in
the
dog
studies;
the
mode
of
action
of
this
chemical
in
insects
(
interferes
with
the
nicotinic
acetyl
choline
receptors
of
the
insect's
nervous
system);
the
transient
clinical
signs
of
neurotoxicity
in
several
studies
across
species;
and
the
suggestive
evidence
of
increased
quantitative
susceptibility
in
the
rat
reproduction
study.

E.
Aggregate
Risks
and
Determination
of
Safety
To
estimate
total
aggregate
exposure
to
a
pesticide
from
food,
drinking
water,
and
residential
uses,
the
Agency
calculates
DWLOCs
which
are
used
as
a
point
of
comparison
against
the
model
estimates
of
a
pesticide's
concentration
in
water
(
EECs).
DWLOC
values
are
not
regulatory
standards
for
drinking
water.
DWLOCs
are
theoretical
upper
limits
on
a
pesticide's
concentration
in
drinking
water
in
light
of
total
aggregate
exposure
to
a
pesticide
in
food
and
residential
uses.
In
calculating
a
DWLOC,
the
Agency
determines
how
much
of
the
acceptable
exposure
(
i.
e.,
the
PAD)
is
available
for
exposure
through
drinking
water
e.
g.,
allowable
chronic
water
exposure
(
mg/
kg/
day)
=
cPAD
­
(
average
food
+
residential
exposure).
This
allowable
exposure
through
drinking
water
is
used
to
calculate
a
DWLOC.
A
DWLOC
will
vary
depending
on
the
toxic
endpoint,
drinking
water
consumption,
and
body
weights.
Default
body
weights
and
consumption
values
as
used
by
EPA's
Office
of
Water
are
used
to
calculate
DWLOCs:
2
liter
(
L)/
70
kg
(
adult
male),
2L/
60
kg
(
adult
female),
and
1L/
10
kg
(
child).
Default
body
weights
and
drinking
water
consumption
values
vary
on
an
individual
basis.
This
variation
will
be
taken
into
account
in
more
refined
screening­
level
and
quantitative
drinking
water
exposure
assessments.
Different
populations
will
have
different
DWLOCs.
Generally,
a
DWLOC
is
calculated
for
each
type
of
risk
assessment
used:
Acute,
short­
term,
intermediate­
term,
chronic,
and
cancer.
When
EECs
for
surface
water
and
ground
water
are
less
than
the
calculated
DWLOCs,
EPA
concludes
with
reasonable
certainty
that
exposures
to
the
pesticide
in
drinking
water
(
when
considered
along
with
other
sources
of
exposure
for
which
EPA
has
reliable
data)
would
not
result
in
unacceptable
levels
of
aggregate
human
health
risk
at
this
time.
Because
EPA
considers
the
aggregate
risk
resulting
from
multiple
exposure
pathways
associated
with
a
pesticide's
uses,
levels
of
comparison
in
drinking
water
may
vary
as
those
uses
change.
If
new
uses
are
added
in
the
future,
EPA
will
reassess
the
potential
impacts
of
residues
of
the
pesticide
in
drinking
water
as
a
part
of
the
aggregate
risk
assessment
process.
1.
Acute
risk.
Using
the
exposure
assumptions
discussed
in
this
unit
for
acute
exposure,
the
acute
dietary
exposure
from
food
to
thiamethoxam
will
occupy
3%
of
the
aPAD
for
the
U.
S.
population,
2%
of
the
aPAD
for
females
13
years
and
older,
9%
of
the
aPAD
for
all
infants
(
less
than
1
year
old),
and
10%
of
the
aPAD
for
children
1
to
2
years
old.
In
addition,
there
is
potential
for
acute
dietary
exposure
to
thiamethoxam
in
drinking
water.
After
calculating
DWLOCs
and
comparing
them
to
the
EECs
for
surface
water
and
ground
water,
EPA
does
not
expect
the
aggregate
exposure
to
exceed
100%
of
the
aPAD,
as
shown
in
the
following
Table
3:

VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
16:
05
Sep
16,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00065
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
17SER1.
SGM
17SER1
54392
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
180
/
Wednesday,
September
17,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
3.
 
AGGREGATE
RISK
ASSESSMENT
FOR
ACUTE
EXPOSURE
TO
THIAMETHOXAM
Population
Subgroup
aPAD
(
mg/
kg)
%
aPAD
(
Food)
Surface
Water
EEC
(
ppb)
Ground
Water
EEC
(
ppb)
Acute
DWLOC
(
ppb)

General
U.
S.
population
0.1
3
7.1
1.94
2,400
All
infants
(<
1
year
old)
0.1
9
7.1
1.94
910
Children
(
1
­
2
years
old)
0.1
10
7.1
1.94
900
Females
(
13
­
49
years
old)
0.1
2
7.1
1.94
2,900
2.
Chronic
risk.
Using
the
exposure
assumptions
described
in
this
unit
for
chronic
exposure,
EPA
has
concluded
that
exposure
to
thiamethoxam
from
food
will
utilize
6%
of
the
cPAD
for
the
U.
S.
population,
14%
of
the
cPAD
for
all
infants
(
less
than
1
year
old),
and
17%
of
the
cPAD
for
children
1
to
2
years
old.
There
are
no
residential
uses
for
thiamethoxam
that
result
in
chronic
residential
exposure
to
thiamethoxam.
In
addition,
there
is
potential
for
chronic
dietary
exposure
to
thiamethoxam
in
drinking
water.
After
calculating
DWLOCs
and
comparing
them
to
the
EECs
for
surface
water
and
ground
water,
EPA
does
not
expect
the
aggregate
exposure
to
exceed
100%
of
the
cPAD,
as
shown
in
the
following
Table
4:

TABLE
4.
 
AGGREGATE
RISK
ASSESSMENT
FOR
CHRONIC
(
NON­
CANCER)
EXPOSURE
TO
THIAMETHOXAM
Population
Subgroup
cPAD
mg/
kg/
day
%
cPAD
(
Food)
Surface
Water
EEC
(
ppb)
Ground
Water
EEC
(
ppb)
Chronic
DWLOC
(
ppb)

U.
S.
population
0.0006
6
0.43
1.94
20
All
infants
(<
1
year
old)
0.0006
14
0.43
1.94
5.1
Children
(
1
­
2
years
old)
0.0006
17
0.43
1.94
5.0
3.
Short­
term
risk.
Short­
term
aggregate
exposure
takes
into
account
residential
exposure
plus
chronic
exposure
to
food
and
water
(
considered
to
be
a
background
exposure
level).
Thiamethoxam
is
not
registered
for
use
on
any
sites
that
would
result
in
residential
exposure.
Therefore,
the
aggregate
risk
is
the
sum
of
the
risk
from
food
and
water,
which
do
not
exceed
the
Agency's
level
of
concern.
4.
Intermediate­
term
risk.
Intermediate­
term
aggregate
exposure
takes
into
account
residential
exposure
plus
chronic
exposure
to
food
and
water
(
considered
to
be
a
background
exposure
level).
Thiamethoxam
is
not
registered
for
use
on
any
sites
that
would
result
in
residential
exposure.
Therefore,
the
aggregate
risk
is
the
sum
of
the
risk
from
food
and
water,
which
do
not
exceed
the
Agency's
level
of
concern.
5.
Aggregate
cancer
risk
for
U.
S.
population.
The
dietary
cancer
risk
from
residues
in
food
is
9.04
x
10­
7.
A
cancer
DWLOC
is
calculated
only
for
the
general
U.
S.
population.
For
risk
management
purposes,
EPA
considers
a
cancer
risk
to
be
greater
than
negligible
when
it
exceeds
the
range
of
1
in
1
million.
EPA
has
generally
treated
cancer
risks
up
to
3
in
1
million
as
within
the
range
of
1
in
1
million.
The
DWLOC
for
cancer
aggregate
risk
(
no
residential
uses)
is
calculated
using
the
following
equations:
DWLOC
cancer
(
µ
g/
L)
=
chronic
water
exposure
milligrams/
kilogram/
day
(
mg/
kg/
day)
x
(
body
weight/
kg)
/
consumption
(
L)
x
10­
3
mg/
µ
g
Chronic
water
exposure
(
mg/
kg/
day)
=
negligible
risk
/
Q*
­
(
chronic
food
exposure)(
mg/
kg/
day)
Assuming
that
the
negligible
risk
value
could
be
as
high
as
3
x
10­
6,
the
chronic
water
exposure
value
is
estimated
to
be:
3
x
10­
6
/
3.77
x
10­
2
­
0.000024
=
0.000056
mg/
kg/
day
The
DWLOC
cancer
=
0.000056
mg/
kg/
day
x
70
kg
/
2L
x
10­
3
mg/
µ
g
=
1.95
µ
g/
L
The
surface
water
EEC
is
0.13
µ
g/
L
and
the
ground
water
EEC
is
1.94
µ
g/
L.
Since
the
ground
water
value
is
greater
than
the
surface
water
value,
it
will
be
used
for
comparison
purposes
and
will
protect
for
any
concerns
for
surface
water
concentrations.
Since
the
cancer
DWLOC
is
not
exceeded
by
the
ground
water
EEC,
the
cancer
risk
is
below
EPA's
level
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,
and
to
infants
and
children
from
aggregate
exposure
to
thiamethoxam
residues.

IV.
Other
Considerations
A.
Analytical
Enforcement
Methodology
Adequate
enforcement
methodology
(
solvent
extraction,
liquid­
liquid
partitioning
and
solid­
phase
extraction
cleanup,
and
high
performance
liquid
chromatography
using
ultra­
violet
detection
(
HPLC/
UV)
analysis)
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;
e­
mail
address:
residuemethods@
epa.
gov.

B.
International
Residue
Limits
There
are
no
international
residue
limits
for
thiamethoxam.

V.
Conclusion
Therefore,
the
tolerances
are
established
for
combined
residues
of
thiamethoxam,
3­[(
2­
chloro­
5­
thiazolyl)
methyl]
tetrahydro­
5­
methyl­
Nnitro
4H­
1,3,5­
oxadiazin­
4­
imine
and
its
metabolite
(
N­(
2­
chloro­
thiazol­
5­
ylmethyl)­
N'­
methyl­
N'­
nitroguanidine
in
or
on
imported
coffee
at
0.05
ppm,
pecan
at
0.02
ppm,
stone
fruit
VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
16:
05
Sep
16,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00066
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
17SER1.
SGM
17SER1
54393
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
180
/
Wednesday,
September
17,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
group
12
at
0.5
ppm,
succulent
bean
at
0.02
ppm,
and
sunflower
at
0.02.

VI.
Objections
and
Hearing
Requests
Under
section
408(
g)
of
the
FFDCA,
as
amended
by
the
FQPA,
any
person
may
file
an
objection
to
any
aspect
of
this
regulation
and
may
also
request
a
hearing
on
those
objections.
EPA
procedural
regulations
which
govern
the
submission
of
objections
and
requests
for
hearings
appear
in
40
CFR
part
178.
Although
the
procedures
in
those
regulations
require
some
modification
to
reflect
the
amendments
made
to
the
FFDCA
by
the
FQPA,
EPA
will
continue
to
use
those
procedures,
with
appropriate
adjustments,
until
the
necessary
modifications
can
be
made.
The
new
section
408(
g)
of
the
FFDCA
provides
essentially
the
same
process
for
persons
to
``
object''
to
a
regulation
for
an
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance
issued
by
EPA
under
new
section
408(
d)
of
FFDCA,
as
was
provided
in
the
old
sections
408
and
409
of
the
FFDCA.
However,
the
period
for
filing
objections
is
now
60
days,
rather
than
30
days.

A.
What
Do
I
Need
to
Do
to
File
an
Objection
or
Request
a
Hearing?
You
must
file
your
objection
or
request
a
hearing
on
this
regulation
in
accordance
with
the
instructions
provided
in
this
unit
and
in
40
CFR
part
178.
To
ensure
proper
receipt
by
EPA,
you
must
identify
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0306
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
on
or
before
November
17,
2003.
1.
Filing
the
request.
Your
objection
must
specify
the
specific
provisions
in
the
regulation
that
you
object
to,
and
the
grounds
for
the
objections
(
40
CFR
178.25).
If
a
hearing
is
requested,
the
objections
must
include
a
statement
of
the
factual
issues(
s)
on
which
a
hearing
is
requested,
the
requestor's
contentions
on
such
issues,
and
a
summary
of
any
evidence
relied
upon
by
the
objector
(
40
CFR
178.27).
Information
submitted
in
connection
with
an
objection
or
hearing
request
may
be
claimed
confidential
by
marking
any
part
or
all
of
that
information
as
CBI.
Information
so
marked
will
not
be
disclosed
except
in
accordance
with
procedures
set
forth
in
40
CFR
part
2.
A
copy
of
the
information
that
does
not
contain
CBI
must
be
submitted
for
inclusion
in
the
public
record.
Information
not
marked
confidential
may
be
disclosed
publicly
by
EPA
without
prior
notice.
Mail
your
written
request
to:
Office
of
the
Hearing
Clerk
(
1900C),
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001.
You
may
also
deliver
your
request
to
the
Office
of
the
Hearing
Clerk
in
Rm.
104,
Crystal
Mall
#
2,
1921
Jefferson
Davis
Hwy.,
Arlington,
VA.
The
Office
of
the
Hearing
Clerk
is
open
from
8
a.
m.
to
4
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.
The
telephone
number
for
the
Office
of
the
Hearing
Clerk
is
(
703)
603
 
0061.
2.
Tolerance
fee
payment.
If
you
file
an
objection
or
request
a
hearing,
you
must
also
pay
the
fee
prescribed
by
40
CFR
180.33(
i)
or
request
a
waiver
of
that
fee
pursuant
to
40
CFR
180.33(
m).
You
must
mail
the
fee
to:
EPA
Headquarters
Accounting
Operations
Branch,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
P.
O.
Box
360277M,
Pittsburgh,
PA
15251.
Please
identify
the
fee
submission
by
labeling
it
``
Tolerance
Petition
Fees.''
EPA
is
authorized
to
waive
any
fee
requirement
``
when
in
the
judgement
of
the
Administrator
such
a
waiver
or
refund
is
equitable
and
not
contrary
to
the
purpose
of
this
subsection.''
For
additional
information
regarding
the
waiver
of
these
fees,
you
may
contact
James
Tompkins
by
phone
at
(
703)
305
 
5697,
by
e­
mail
at
tompkins.
jim@
epa.
gov,
or
by
mailing
a
request
for
information
to
Mr.
Tompkins
at
Registration
Division
(
7505C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001.
If
you
would
like
to
request
a
waiver
of
the
tolerance
objection
fees,
you
must
mail
your
request
for
such
a
waiver
to:
James
Hollins,
Information
Resources
and
Services
Division
(
7502C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001.
3.
Copies
for
the
Docket.
In
addition
to
filing
an
objection
or
hearing
request
with
the
Hearing
Clerk
as
described
in
Unit
VI.
A.,
you
should
also
send
a
copy
of
your
request
to
the
PIRIB
for
its
inclusion
in
the
official
record
that
is
described
in
Unit
I.
B.
1.
Mail
your
copies,
identified
by
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0306,
to:
Public
Information
and
Records
Integrity
Branch,
Information
Resources
and
Services
Division
(
7502C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001.
In
person
or
by
courier,
bring
a
copy
to
the
location
of
the
PIRIB
described
in
Unit
I.
B.
1.
You
may
also
send
an
electronic
copy
of
your
request
via
e­
mail
to:
oppdocket
epa.
gov.
Please
use
an
ASCII
file
format
and
avoid
the
use
of
special
characters
and
any
form
of
encryption.
Copies
of
electronic
objections
and
hearing
requests
will
also
be
accepted
on
disks
in
WordPerfect
6.1/
8.0
or
ASCII
file
format.
Do
not
include
any
CBI
in
your
electronic
copy.
You
may
also
submit
an
electronic
copy
of
your
request
at
many
Federal
Depository
Libraries.

B.
When
Will
the
Agency
Grant
a
Request
for
a
Hearing?
A
request
for
a
hearing
will
be
granted
if
the
Administrator
determines
that
the
material
submitted
shows
the
following:
There
is
a
genuine
and
substantial
issue
of
fact;
there
is
a
reasonable
possibility
that
available
evidence
identified
by
the
requestor
would,
if
established
resolve
1
or
more
of
such
issues
in
favor
of
the
requestor,
taking
into
account
uncontested
claims
or
facts
to
the
contrary;
and
resolution
of
the
factual
issues(
s)
in
the
manner
sought
by
the
requestor
would
be
adequate
to
justify
the
action
requested
(
40
CFR
178.32).

VII.
Statutory
and
Executive
Order
Reviews
This
final
rule
establishes
a
tolerance
under
section
408(
d)
of
the
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
rule
has
been
exempted
from
review
under
Executive
Order
12866
due
to
its
lack
of
significance,
this
rule
is
not
subject
to
Executive
Order
13211,
Actions
Concerning
Regulations
That
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use
(
66
FR
28355,
May
22,
2001).
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.,
or
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).
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);
or
OMB
review
or
any
Agency
action
under
Executive
Order
13045,
entitled
Protection
of
Children
from
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks
(
62
FR
19885,
April
23,
1997).
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
VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
16:
05
Sep
16,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00067
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
17SER1.
SGM
17SER1
54394
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
180
/
Wednesday,
September
17,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
(
NTTAA),
Public
Law
104
 
113,
section
12(
d)
(
15
U.
S.
C.
272
note).
Since
tolerances
and
exemptions
that
are
established
on
the
basis
of
a
petition
under
section
408(
d)
of
the
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.
In
addition,
the
Agency
has
determined
that
this
action
will
not
have
a
substantial
direct
effect
on
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13132,
entitled
Federalism
(
64
FR
43255,
August
10,
1999).
Executive
Order
13132
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
State
and
local
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
federalism
implications.''
``
Policies
that
have
federalism
implications''
is
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government.''
This
final
rule
directly
regulates
growers,
food
processors,
food
handlers
and
food
retailers,
not
States.
This
action
does
not
alter
the
relationships
or
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
established
by
Congress
in
the
preemption
provisions
of
section
408(
n)(
4)
of
the
FFDCA.
For
these
same
reasons,
the
Agency
has
determined
that
this
rule
does
not
have
any
``
tribal
implications''
as
described
in
Executive
Order
13175,
entitled
Consultation
and
Coordination
with
Indian
Tribal
Governments
(
65
FR
67249,
November
6,
2000).
Executive
Order
13175,
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
tribal
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
tribal
implications.''
``
Policies
that
have
tribal
implications''
is
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
one
or
more
Indian
tribes,
on
the
relationship
between
the
Federal
Government
and
the
Indian
tribes,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
between
the
Federal
Government
and
Indian
tribes.''
This
rule
will
not
have
substantial
direct
effects
on
tribal
governments,
on
the
relationship
between
the
Federal
Government
and
Indian
tribes,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
between
the
Federal
Government
and
Indian
tribes,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13175.
Thus,
Executive
Order
13175
does
not
apply
to
this
rule.

VIII.
Congressional
Review
Act
The
Congressional
Review
Act,
5
U.
S.
C.
801
et
seq.,
as
added
by
the
Small
Business
Regulatory
Enforcement
Fairness
Act
of
1996,
generally
provides
that
before
a
rule
may
take
effect,
the
agency
promulgating
the
rule
must
submit
a
rule
report,
which
includes
a
copy
of
the
rule,
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:
September
10,
2003.
Debra
Edwards,
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),
346(
a)
and
371.


2.
Section
180.565
is
amended
by
alphabetically
adding
the
following
commodities
to
the
table
in
paragraph
(
a)
to
read
as
follows:

§
180.565
Thiamethoxam;
tolerances
for
residues.

(
a)
*
*
*

Commodity
Parts
per
million
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Bean,
succulent
.....................................................................................................................
0.02
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Coffee1
...................................................................................................................................
0.05
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Fruit,
stone,
group
12
............................................................................................................
0.5
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Pecans
...................................................................................................................................
0.02
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Sunflower
...............................................................................................................................
0.02
1There
are
no
U.
S.
registrations
as
of
September
17,
2003.

*
*
*
*
*
[
FR
Doc.
03
 
23852
Filed
9
 
15
 
03;
1:
28
pm]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
S
FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47
CFR
Part
73
[
DA
03
 
2830;
MM
Docket
No.
01
 
244,
RM
 
10234;
MM
Docket
No.
01
 
245,
RM
 
10235]

Digital
Television
Broadcast
Service;
Tyler
and
Lufkin,
TX
AGENCY:
Federal
Communications
Commission.
ACTION:
Final
rule.

SUMMARY:
The
Commission,
by
this
document,
denies
a
petition
for
reconsideration
filed
by
International
Broadcasting
Network
of
the
Report
and
Order,
which
substituted
DTV
channel
10
for
DTV
channel
38
at
Tyler,
Texas,
and
DTV
channel
11
for
DTV
channel
43
at
Lufkin,
Texas.
See
67
FR
63852,
October
16,
2002.
With
this
action,
this
proceeding
is
terminated.

VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
16:
05
Sep
16,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00068
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
17SER1.
SGM
17SER1