Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0655-0008
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Pesticide Tolerances; Exemptions: 2-Pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl-
Posted Date: 2016-11-10T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 218 (Thursday, November 10, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78923-78928]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27212]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0655; FRL-9953-82]

2-Pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl-; Exemption From the Requirement of a 
Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement 
of a tolerance for residues of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- (CAS Reg. No. 
3470-98-2) when used as an inert ingredient (solvent/cosolvent) in 
pesticide formulations applied to growing crops only at a concentration 
not to exceed 30% by weight under EPA regulations. SciReg. Inc. on 
behalf of Taminco U.S., Inc. a subsidiary of Eastman Chemical Company 
submitted a petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 
Act (FFDCA), requesting the establishment of an exemption from the 
requirement of a tolerance. This rule eliminates the need to establish 
a maximum permissible level for residues of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- 
when used in accordance with the regulations.

DATES: This regulation is effective November 10, 2016. Objections and 
requests for hearings must be received on or before January 9, 2017, 
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket 
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0655, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory 
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency 
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public 
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public 
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP 
Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and 
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Goodis, Registration Division 
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone 
number: (703) 305-7090; email address: RDFRNotices@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an 
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. 
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System 
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. 
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR 
part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an 
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a 
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a 
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided 
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify 
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0655 in the subject line on the first 
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must 
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before 
January 9, 2017. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and 
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the 
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of 
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for 
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential 
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without 
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing 
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0655, by one of 
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit 
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket 
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand 
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the 
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional 
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more 
information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Petition for Exemption

    In the Federal Register of October 21, 2015 (80 FR 63731) (FRL-
9935-29), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 
U.S.C. 346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP IN-
10854) by SciReg Inc. (12733 Director's Loop, Woodbridge, VA 22192) on 
behalf of Taminco U.S., Inc.

[[Page 78924]]

a subsidiary of Eastman Chemical Company (Two Windsor Plaza, Suite 400, 
7540 Windsor Drive, Allentown, PA 18195). The petition requested that 
40 CFR 180.920 be amended by establishing an exemption from the 
requirement of a tolerance for residues of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- 
(CAS Reg. No. 3470-98-2), when used as an inert ingredient (solvent/
cosolvent) in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops only. 
That document referenced a summary of the petition prepared by SciReg. 
Inc. on behalf of Taminco U.S., Inc., the petitioner, which is 
available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. No relevant 
comments were received on the notice of filing.
    Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA has 
limited the concentration of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- in final 
pesticide formulation not to exceed 30% w/w. This limitation is based 
on the Agency's risk assessment which can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document Human Health Risk Assessment and 
Ecological Effects Assessment to Support Proposed Exemption from the 
Requirement of a Tolerance When Used as an Inert Ingredient in 
Pesticide Formulations in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0655.

III. Inert Ingredient Definition

    Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active 
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not 
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a 
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and 
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty 
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as 
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing 
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents; 
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply 
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active. 
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a 
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert 
ingredients.

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an 
exemption from the requirement for 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. . . .''
    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only 
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from 
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably 
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human 
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to 
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the 
inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert 
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures 
that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA 
is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure 
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from 
aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the 
requirement of a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors 
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), 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 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- 
including exposure resulting from the exemption established by this 
action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with 2-
pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their 
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. Specific information on the studies received and the nature 
of the adverse effects caused by 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- as well as 
the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-
adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in 
this unit.
    The oral LD50 for 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- in the rat 
is greater than 300 mg/kg. The dermal LD50 in the rat is > 
2,000 mg/kg. It is moderately irritating to the eye of New Zealand 
White rabbits. It is slightly irritating to the skin of New Zealand 
White rabbits. It is not a skin sensitizer in mice in the local lymph 
node assay.
    A 90-day subchronic oral toxicity study was conducted with Wistar 
rats exposed to 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- via gavage dose of 0, 10, 
100, and 500 mg/kg/day, according to OECD Test Guideline 408. The 
following effects were considered to be treatment-related and adaptive 
in nature and, therefore, not adverse:
    1. The microscopic liver changes in animals of either sex treated 
with 500 mg/kg/day and males treated with 100 mg/kg/day; however, these 
changes were not associated with blood chemistry changes. Therefore 
they were considered as an adaptive response.
    2. The microscopic changes in the adrenals of males treated with 
500 and 100 mg/kg/day and the microscopic thymus changes were not 
associated with any changes in the organ weights, therefore they were 
not considered as adverse effects. Minor changes in the kidney weights 
were not associated with any clinical chemistry changes or treatment 
related histopathological findings; therefore, it was not considered 
adverse. The NOAEL is 500 mg/kg/day.
    A prenatal development toxicity study was conducted with 2-
pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl-, in accordance with OECD Test Guideline 414 
using Pregnant Crl:CD(SD) rats exposed to the test item at 
concentrations of 0, 5, 50, or 500 mg/kg/day by oral gavage. Maternal 
toxicity was manifested as decreased food consumption and weight loss 
on days 6 to 19 of gestation at a dose level of 500 mg/kg/day. 
Developmental toxicity was manifested as decreased fetal weight in 
female fetuses at the same dose as maternal toxicity, 500 mg/kg/day. 
There was no evidence of fetal susceptibility. The NOAEL for 
developmental toxicity of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- was determined to 
be 50 mg/kg/day.
    Since there is a wide dose spread in the developmental toxicity 
study in rats, a benchmark dose (BMD) modeling was conducted using 
decreased fetal weight

[[Page 78925]]

as an adverse effect. The BMD value is 306 mg/kg/day and the average 
BMDL is 201 mg/kg/day for a 5% response in decreased fetal body weight.
    Carcinogenicity data are not available for 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-
butyl-. In the 90-day toxicity study, the liver, kidney, thymus, and 
adrenals were target organs, however, they were considered as adaptive 
response at the dose levels tested. Evaluation of the database for N-
methylpyrrolidone (NMP) shows similar target organ toxicity as 2-
pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- (structurally related chemicals differing only 
in carbon chain length (1 vs 4 carbon chain length)) and 1-
ethylpyrrolidin-2-one (NEP) (2 carbon chain length), as both chemicals 
are considered suitable surrogates for evaluation. Neither 2-
pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl-, N-methylpyrrolidone, nor 1-ethylpyrrolidin-2-
one was found to be genotoxic or mutagenic in a number of assays. In 
carcinogenicity studies, N-methylpyrrolidone was not carcinogenic in 
two-year rat studies by the inhalation and dietary routes of exposure. 
An increased incidence of liver adenomas and carcinomas was seen in 
mice exposed to a dietary level of N-methylpyrrolidone exceeding 1,000 
mg/kg/day for 18 months. However, based on the lack of mutagenicity or 
genotoxicity and the similarity of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- to n-
methylpyrrolidone, it can be concluded that 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- 
should not be considered as potentially carcinogenic at doses below the 
limit dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day.
    The mutagenic potential of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- was assessed 
in the Salmonella typhimurium reverse mutation assay, mammalian cell 
gene mutation and micronucleus tests. 2-Pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- was 
negative in all assays. Therefore, 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- is not 
considered mutagenic nor clastogenic.
    There were no studies/data directly related to the possible 
neurotoxicity of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl. However, evidence of 
potential neurotoxicity was not observed in functional observation 
battery (FOB) performed in the 90-day oral toxicity study in the rat. 
Therefore, pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl is not expected to be neurotoxic.
    There were no studies/data directly related to the immunotoxicity 
of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl. Thymic atrophy was observed at >100 mg/kg/
day in rats treated with 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl for 90 days via 
gavage. However, microscopic changes in thymus were considered as an 
adaptive response and not as an adverse effect.
    There were no studies/data directly related to the metabolism, of 
2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA 
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of 
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the 
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no 
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for 
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed 
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to 
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) 
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified 
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with 
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a 
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe 
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes 
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the 
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of 
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the 
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete 
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    For purposes of risk assessment, the Agency utilizes the toxicity 
point of departure identified in the developmental toxicity study in 
rats for chronic dietary assessment, residential exposure assessment 
and all dermal and inhalation exposure durations. Since there was a 
large dose spread, a benchmark dose modeling (BMD) assessment was 
conducted. The average benchmark model lower confidence limit (BMDL) is 
201 mg/kg/day for a 5% response which was based on a 5% decreased fetal 
body weight. The BMDL of 201 mg/kg/day is used as a point departure for 
the risk assessment. An uncertainty factor of 10X is applied for 
interspecies extrapolation and an uncertainty factor of 10X is applied 
for intraspecies variation. The Food Quality Protection Act factor is 
reduced to 1X. Therefore, the Agency's level of concern is for Margins 
of Exposure (MOE) less than 100. No endpoint of concern was identified 
for acute dietary assessment in the database. Although there was a 
decrease in body weights in maternal animals on GD7 in the 
developmental toxicity study in rats, this effect is not considered 
relevant for acute dietary exposure assessment since the body weights 
returned to normal on GD8. A cancer risk assessment was not conducted 
because the Agency concluded that 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl is unlikely 
to be carcinogenic at the anticipated dietary exposure levels. Dermal 
and inhalation absorption is assumed 100% of the oral equivalent dose.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary 
exposure to 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl-, EPA considered exposure under 
the proposed exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. EPA 
assessed dietary exposures from 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- in food as 
follows:
    Dietary exposure (food and drinking water) to 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-
butyl- can occur following ingestion of foods with residues from 
treated crops. Because no adverse effects attributable to a single 
exposure of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- are seen in the toxicity 
databases, an acute dietary risk assessment is not necessary. For the 
chronic dietary risk assessment, EPA used the Dietary Exposure 
Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database 
(DEEM-FCIDTM, Version 3.16, and food consumption information 
from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) 2003-2008 National 
Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat in America 
(NHANES/WWEIA). One hundred percent crop treated was assumed, default 
processing factors, and tolerance-level residues for all foods and use 
limitations of not more than 30% by weight of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- 
in pesticide formulations applied to food.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. For the purpose of the 
screening-level dietary risk assessment to support this request for an 
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of 2-
pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- a conservative drinking water concentration 
value of 100 ppb based on screening-level modeling was used to assess 
the contribution to drinking water for the chronic dietary risk 
assessment. This value was directly entered into the dietary exposure 
model.
    3. From non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is 
used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary 
exposure (e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming 
pools, and hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, tables).

[[Page 78926]]

    2-Pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- may be used as an inert ingredient in 
products that are registered for specific uses that may result in 
residential exposure, such as pesticides used in and around the home. 
The Agency conducted a screening level assessment to represent worst-
case residential exposure by assessing 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- in 
pesticide formulations (Outdoor Scenarios) and in disinfectant-type 
uses (Indoor Scenarios).
    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 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- to share a common 
mechanism of toxicity with any other substances, and 2-pyrrolidinone, 
1-butyl do not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other 
substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA 
has assumed that 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- 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 Web site 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 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. A developmental toxicity 
study in rats was available with 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl. Fetal 
susceptibility was not observed. Maternal and developmental toxicity 
were observed at the same dose, 500 mg/kg/day, the highest dose tested.
    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 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl is adequate 
for FQPA assessment. It includes a 90-day rat oral toxicity study with 
FOB measurements, a prenatal developmental study in rats, acute 
toxicity studies and mutagenicity studies.
    ii. There is no evidence of increased susceptibility in the 
database. There are no concerns for the lack of 2-generation 
reproduction study because the male and female reproductive parameters 
were evaluated in the 90-day study and no evidence of fetal 
susceptibility was seen in the rat developmental toxicity study in 
rats.
    iii. There were no studies/data directly related to the possible 
neurotoxicity of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl. However, no evidence of 
potential neurotoxicity was observed in the functional observation 
battery (FOB) performed in the 90-day oral toxicity study in the rat. 
Therefore, pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl is not expected to be neurotoxic.
    iv. There were no studies/data directly related to the immunotoxic 
potential of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl. However, no evidence of 
potential immunotoxicity was observed in the 90-day oral toxicity study 
in rats. EPA concluded that the immunotoxicity study is not required at 
this time.
    v. The dietary food exposure assessment utilizes proposed tolerance 
level or higher residues and 100% crop treated (CT) information for all 
commodities. In addition, a conservative drinking water concentration 
value of 100 parts per billion (ppb) was used to assess the 
contribution to drinking water. By using these screening-level 
assessments, chronic exposures/risks will not be underestimated.
    Taking into consideration the available information, EPA concludes 
the additional 10X FQPA safety factor be reduced to 1X.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide 
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the 
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA 
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the 
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term 
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, 
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an 
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into 
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and 
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure 
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore, 
2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- is not expected to pose an acute risk.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this 
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to, 
2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- from food and water will utilize 21.1% of the 
cPAD for children 1-2 years old, the population group receiving the 
greatest exposure.
    3. Short-term and intermediate-term risk. Short-term and 
intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account short-term and 
intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food 
and water (considered to be a background exposure level).
    2-Pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- may be used as inert ingredients in 
pesticide products that could result in short-term and intermediate-
term residential exposure and the Agency has determined that it is 
appropriate to aggregate chronic exposure through food and water with 
short-term and intermediate-term residential exposures to 2-
pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl-. Using the exposure assumptions described 
above, EPA has concluded that the combined short-term and intermediate-
term aggregated food, water, and residential exposures result in an MOE 
of 350 for both adult males and females respectively. Adult residential 
exposure combines high-end dermal and inhalation handler exposure from 
indoor hard surface, wiping with a high-end post application dermal 
exposure from contact with treated lawns. As the level of concern is 
for MOEs that are lower than 100, this MOE is not of concern. EPA has 
concluded the combined short-term and intermediate-term aggregated 
food, water, and residential exposures result in an aggregate MOE of 
218 for children. Children's residential exposure includes total 
exposures associated with contact with treated lawns (dermal and hand-
to-mouth exposures). As the level of concern is for MOEs that are lower 
than 100, this MOEs is not of concern.
    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on lack of 
carcinogenicity for N-methyl pyrrolidone (a surrogate chemical of 2-
pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl-), 2-

[[Page 78927]]

pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- is not expected to pose a cancer risk to 
humans.
    5. 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 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- residues.

V. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since 
the Agency is not establishing a numerical tolerance for residues of 2-
pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- in or on any food commodities. EPA is 
establishing a limitation on the amount of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- 
that may be used in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops. 
That limitation will be enforced through the pesticide registration 
process under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 
(``FIFRA''), 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq. EPA will not register any pesticide 
formulation for use on growing crops for sale or distribution that 
exceed 30% of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl-.

B. Revision to Petitioned-for Tolerances

    The submitter requested an unlimited use of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-
butyl in pesticide formulations under 180.920. However, MOEs for the 
aggregate residential exposure exceeded the Agency's level of concern; 
therefore the refinement was made using 30% maximum concentration in 
the final formulation. At that concentration level, the Agency is able 
to support the safety finding for the inert tolerance exemption; 
therefore, the Agency is limiting the tolerance exemption to cover 
residues of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl only when used at levels not to 
exceed 30% by weight in pesticide formulations.

VI. Conclusions

    Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is 
established under 40 CFR 180.920 for residues of 2-pyrrolidinone, 1-
butyl- (CAS Reg. No. 3470-98-2) when used as an inert ingredient 
(solvent/cosolvent) in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops 
at a concentration not to exceed 30% by weight in the end-use 
formulation.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes an exemption to the requirement for a 
tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition 
submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 
12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 51735, 
October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review 
under Executive Order 12866, this action 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 action does not contain any information 
collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any special 
considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal Actions 
to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis 
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the exemption 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 action directly regulates growers, food processors, food 
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this 
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and 
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions 
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that 
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or 
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government 
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has 
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled 
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this 
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded 
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would 
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant 
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VIII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), 
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required 
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and 
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of 
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' 
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 20, 2016.
Michael Goodis,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.920, add alphabetically the inert ingredient ``2-
Pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- (CAS Reg. No. 3470-98-2)'' to the table to read 
as follows:

Sec.  180.920   Inert ingredients used pre-harvest; exemptions from the 
requirement of a tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Inert ingredients                Limits                Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
2-Pyrrolidinone, 1-butyl- (CAS  Not to exceed 30% by    Solvent/
 Reg. No. 3470-98-2).            weight of pesticide     cosolvent.
                                 formulation.
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 78928]]

[FR Doc. 2016-27212 Filed 11-9-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P