PMEP Home Page --> Pesticide Active Ingredient Information --> Insecticides and Miticides --> Insecticides, R to Z --> Tebufenozide --> Tebufenozide - Pesticide Tolerance 5/00

Tebufenozide - Pesticide Tolerance 5/00

[Federal Register: May 24, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 101)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 33472-33479]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr24my00-13]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP-300999; FRL-6555-1]
RIN 2070-AB78
Tebufenozide; Benzoic Acid, 3,5-dimethyl-1-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-2-
(4-ethylbenzoyl) hydrazide; Pesticide Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of
tebufenozide [benzoic acid, 3,5-dimethyl-1-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-2-(4-
ethylbenzoyl)hydrazide], in or on the tree nut crop group (including
pistachios) at 0.1 part per million (ppm) and on almond hulls at 25
ppm. Rohm and Haas Company requested this tolerance under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Food Quality Protection
Act of 1996.

DATES: This regulation is effective May 24, 2000. Objections and
requests for hearings, identified by docket control number OPP-300999,
must be received by EPA on or before July 24, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and hearing requests may be submitted by
mail, in person, or by courier. Please follow the detailed instructions
for each method as provided in Unit VI. of the "SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION." To ensure proper receipt by EPA, your objections and
hearing requests must identify docket control number OPP-300999 in the
subject line on the first page of your response.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail: Joseph Tavano, Registration
Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,
NW.,Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (703) 305-6411 and e-mail
address: tavano.joseph@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does This Action Apply to Me?

    You may be affected by this action if you sell, distribute,
manufacture, or use pesticides for agricultural applications, process
food, distribute or sell food, or implement governmental pesticide
regulations. Potentially affected categories and entities may include,
but are not limited to:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        NAICS    Examples of potentially
             Categories                 codes       affected entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry                                    111  Crop production
                                            112  Animal production
                                            311  Food manufacturing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          32532  Pesticide manufacturing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agricultural Stakeholders                        Growers/Agricultural
                                                  Workers, Contractors
                                                  (Certified/Commercial
                                                  Applicators, Handlers,
                                                  Advisors, etc.),
                                                  Commercial Processors,
                                                  Pesticide
                                                  Manufacturers, User
                                                  Groups, Food Consumers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Food Distributors                                Wholesale Contractors,
                                                  Retail Vendors,
                                                  Commercial Traders/
                                                  Importers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inter governmental Stakeholders                  State, Local, and/or
                                                  Tribal Government
                                                  Agencies
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Foreign Entities                                 Governments, Growers,
                                                  Trade Groups,
                                                  Exporters
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 33473]]

    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 the table could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether or not this action might apply to certain entities. If you have
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 Additional Information, Including Copies of this
Document and Other Related Documents?

    1. Electronically. You may obtain electronic copies of this
document, and certain other related documents that might be available
electronically, from the EPA Internet Home Page at http://www.epa.gov/.
To access this document, on the Home Page select "Laws and
Regulations" and then look up the entry for this document under the
"Federal Register--Environmental Documents." You can also go directly
to the Federal Register listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
    2. In person. The Agency has established an official record for
this action under docket control number OPP-300999. The official record
consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, and
other information related to this action, including any information
claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI). This official
record includes the documents that are physically located in the
docket, as well as the documents that are referenced in those
documents. The public version of the official record does not include
any information claimed as CBI. The public version of the official
record, which includes printed, paper versions of any electronic
comments submitted during an applicable comment period is available for
inspection in the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch
(PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy.,
Arlington, VA, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305-5805.

II. Background and Statutory Findings

    In the Federal Register of August 19, 1998 (63 FR 44439) (FRL 6019-
6), and February 17, 1999 (64 FR 7883) (FRL 6060-1), EPA issued a
notice pursuant to section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a as amended by the Food Quality Protection
Act of 1996 (FQPA) (Public Law 104-170) announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP) 7F4815 for a tolerance by Rohm and Haas
Company, 100 Independence Mall West, Philadelphia, 19106-2399. This
notice included a summary of the petition prepared by Rohm and Haas
Company, the registrant. There were no comments received in response to
the notice of filing.
    The petition requested that 40 CFR 180.482 be amended by
establishing tolerances for residues of the insecticide tebufenozide in
or on the tree nut crop group (including pistachios) at 0.1 ppm and on
almond hulls at 25 ppm.
    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish
tolerances (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) 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 food and drinking water and in residential
settings, but does not include occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) 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 and a complete description of
the risk assessment process, see the final rule on Bifenthrin Pesticide
Tolerances (62 FR 62961, November 26, 1997) (FRL-5754-7).

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the
available scientific data and other relevant information in support of
this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to
make a determination on aggregate exposure, consistent with section
408(b)(2), for tolerances for residues of tebufenozide on the tree nut
crop group (including pistachios) at 0.1 ppm and on almond hulls at 25
ppm. EPA's assessment of the exposures and risks associated with
establishing the tolerance 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 tebufenozide are
discussed in this unit.

B. Toxicological Endpoints

    1. Acute toxicity-- i. Acute toxicity studies with technical grade:
Oral LD50 in the rat is > 5 grams for males and females--
Toxicity Category IV; dermal LD50 in the rat is = 5,000
milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg) for males and females--Toxicity Category
III; inhalation LC50 in the rat is >4.5 milligram/Liter (mg/
L) - Toxicity Category III; primary eye irritation study in the rabbit
is a non-irritant; primary skin irritation in the rabbit >5 mg/kg--
Toxicity Category IV. Tebufenozide is not a sensitizer.
    ii. In a 21-day dermal toxicity study, Crl:CD rats (6/sex/dose)
received repeated dermal administration of either the technical (96.1%)
product (RH-75,992) at 1,000 (mg/kg/day) (Limit-Dose) or the
formulation (23.1% active ingredient (a.i.)) product (RH-755,992 2F) at
0, 62.5, 250, or 1,000 milligram/kilogram/day (mg/kg/day), 6 hours/day,
5 days/week for 21 days. Under conditions of this study, RH-75,992
Technical or RH-75,992 2F demonstrated no systemic toxicity or dermal
irritation at the highest dose tested (HDT) 1,000 mg/kg during the 21-
day study. Based on these results, the no-observed adverse effect level
(NOAEL) for systemic toxicity and dermal irritation in both sexes is
1,000 mg/kg/day HDT. A lowest-observed

[[Page 33474]]

adverse effect level (LOAEL) for systemic toxicity and dermal
irritation was not established.
    iii. A 1-year dog feeding study with a LOAEL of 250 ppm (9 mg/kg/
day for male and female dogs) based on decreases in RBC, HCT, and HGB,
increases in Heinz bodies, methemoglobin, MCV, MCH, reticulocytes,
platelets, plasma total bilirubin, spleen weight, and spleen/body
weight ratio, and liver/body weight ratio. Hematopoiesis and sinusoidal
engorgement occurred in the spleen, and hyperplasia occurred in the
marrow of the femur and sternum. The liver showed an increased pigment
in the Kupffer cells. The NOAEL for systemic toxicity in both sexes is
50 ppm (1.9 mg/kg/day).
    iv. An 18-month mouse carcinogenicity study with no carcinogenicity
observed at dosage levels up to and including 1,000 ppm.
    v. A 2-year rat carcinogenicity study with no carcinogenicity
observed at dosage levels up to and including 2,000 ppm (97 mg/kg/day
and 125 mg/kg/day for males and females, respectively)
    vi. In a prenatal developmental toxicity study in Sprague-Dawley
rats (25/group), tebufenozide was administered on gestation days 6-15
by gavage in aqueous methyl cellulose at dose levels of 50, 250, or
1,000 mg/kg/day and a dose volume of 10 ml/kg. There was no evidence of
maternal or developmental toxicity; the maternal and developmental
toxicity NOAEL was 1,000 mg/kg/day.
    vii. In a prenatal developmental toxicity study conducted in New
Zealand white rabbits (20/group), tebufenozide was administered in 5
ml/kg of aqueous methyl cellulose at gavage doses of 50, 250, or 1,000
mg/kg/day on gestation days 7-19. No evidence of maternal or
developmental toxicity was observed; the maternal and developmental
toxicity NOAEL was 1,000 mg/kg/day.
    viii. In a 1993 2-generation reproduction study in Sprague-Dawley
rats, tebufenozide was administered at dietary concentrations of 0, 10,
150, or 1,000 ppm (0, 0.8, 11.5, or 154.8 mg/kg/day for males and 0,
0.9, 12.8, or 171.1 mg/kg/day for females). The parental systemic NOAEL
was 10 ppm (0.8/0.9 mg/kg/day for males and females, respectively) and
the LOAEL was 150 ppm (11.5/12.8 mg/kg/day for males and females,
respectively) based on decreased body weight, body weight gain, and
food consumption in males, and increased incidence and/or severity of
splenic pigmentation. In addition, there was an increased incidence and
severity of extramedullary hematopoiesis at 2,000 ppm. The reproductive
NOAEL was 150 ppm. (11.5/12.8 mg/kg/day for males and females,
respectively) and the LOAEL was 2,000 ppm (154.8/171.1 mg/kg/day for
males and females, respectively) based on an increase in the number of
pregnant females with increased gestation duration and dystopia.
Effects in the offspring consisted of decreased number of pups per
litter on postnatal days 0 and/or 4 at 2,000 ppm (154.8/171.1 mg/kg/day
for males and females, respectively) with a NOAEL of 150 ppm (11.5/12.8
mg/kg/day for males and females, respectively).
    ix. In a 1995 2-generation reproduction study in rats, tebufenozide
was administered at dietary concentrations of 0, 25, 200, or 2,000 ppm
(0, 1.6, 12.6, or 126.0 mg/kg/day for males and 0, 1.8, 14.6, or 143.2
mg/kg/day for females). For parental systemic toxicity, the NOAEL was
25 ppm (1.6/1.8 mg/kg/day in males and females, respectively), and the
LOAEL was 200 ppm (12.6/14.6 mg/kg/day in males and females), based on
histopathological findings (congestion and extramedullary
hematopoiesis) in the spleen. Additionally, at 2,000 ppm (126.0/143.2
mg/kg/day in M/F), treatment-related findings included reduced parental
body weight gain and increased incidence of hemosiderin-laden cells in
the spleen. Columnar changes in the vaginal squamous epithelium and
reduced uterine and ovarian weights were also observed at 2,000 ppm,
but the toxicological significance was unknown. For offspring, the
systemic NOAEL was 200 ppm (12.6/14.6 mg/kg/day in males and females),
and the LOAEL was 2,000 ppm (126.0/143.2 mg/kg/day in M/F) based on
decreased body weight on postnatal days 14 and 21.
    x. Several mutagenicity tests which were all negative. These
include an Ames assay with and without metabolic activation, an in vivo
cytogenetic assay in rat bone marrow cells, and in vitro chromosome
aberration assay in CHO cells, a CHO/HGPRT assay, a reverse mutation
assay with E. Coli, and an unscheduled DNA synthesis assay (UDS) in rat
hepatocytes.
    xi. The pharmacokinetics and metabolism of tebufenozide were
studied in female Sprague-Dawley rats (3-6/sex/group) receiving a
single oral dose of 3 or 250 mg/kg of RH-5992, 14C labeled
in one of three positions (A-ring, B-ring or N-butylcarbon). The extent
of absorption was not established. The majority of the radio labeled
material was eliminated or excreted in the feces within 48 hours; small
amounts (1 to 7% of the administered dose) were excreted in the urine
and only traces were excreted in expired air or remained in the
tissues. There was no tendency for bioaccumulation. Absorption and
excretion were rapid. A total of 11 metabolites, in addition to the
parent compound, were identified in the feces; the parent compound
accounted for 96 to 99% of the administered radioactivity in the high
dose group and 35 to 43% in the low dose group. No parent compound was
found in the urine; urinary metabolites were not characterized. The
identity of several fecal metabolites was confirmed by mass spectral
analysis and other fecal metabolites were tentatively identified by
cochromatography with synthetic standards. A pathway of metabolism was
proposed based on these data. Metabolism proceeded primarily by
oxidation of the three benzyl carbons, two methyl groups on the B-ring
and an ethyl group on the A-ring to alcohols, aldehydes or acids. The
type of metabolite produced varies depending on the position oxidized
and extent of oxidation. The butyl group on the quaternary nitrogen
also can be cleaved (minor), but there was no fragmentation of the
molecule between the benzyl rings.
    No qualitative differences in metabolism were observed between
sexes, when high or low dose groups were compared or when different
labeled versions of the molecule were compared.
    xii. The absorption and metabolism of tebufenozide were studied in
a group of males and female bile-duct cannulated rats. Over a 72-hour
period, biliary excretion accounted for 30% females to 34% males of the
administered dose while urinary excretion accounted for ca. 55%
of the administered dose and the carcass accounted for <0.5% of the
administered dose for both males and females. Thus, systemic absorption
(percent of dose recovered in the bile, urine and carcass) was 35%
females to 39% males. The majority of the radioactivity in the bile
(20% females to 24% males of the administered dose) was excreted within
the first 6 hours postdosing indicating rapid absorption. Furthermore,
urinary excretion of the metabolites was essentially complete within 24
hours postdosing. A large amount (67% males to 70% females) of the
administered dose was unabsorbed and excreted in the feces by 72 hours.
Total recovery of radioactivity was 105% of the administered dose.
    A total of 13 metabolites were identified in the bile; the parent
compound was not identified (i.e. - unabsorbed compound) nor were the
primary oxidation products seen in the

[[Page 33475]]

feces in the pharmacokinetics study. The proposed metabolic pathway
proceeded by primary oxidation of the benzylic carbons to alcohols,
aldehydes or acids. Bile contained most of the other highly oxidized
products found in the feces. The most significant individual bile
metabolites accounted for 5% to 18% of the total radioactivity (males
and/or females). Bile also contained the previously undetected (in the
pharmacokinetics study) "A" Ring ketone and the "B" Ring diol. The
other major components were characterized as high molecular weight
conjugates. No individual bile metabolite accounted for >5% of the
total administered dose. Total bile radioactivity accounted for
≈17% of the total administered dose. No major qualitative
differences in biliary metabolites were observed between sexes. The
metabolic profile in the bile was similar to the metabolic profile in
the feces and urine.
    2. Short- and intermediate-term toxicity. No dermal or systemic
toxicity was seen in rats receiving 15 repeated dermal applications of
the technical (97.2%) product at 1,000 mg/kg/day (Limit-Dose) as well
as a formulated (23% active ingredient (a.i)) product at 0, 62.5, 250,
or 1,000 mg/kg/day over a 21-day period. The Agency noted that in spite
of the hematological effects seen in the dog study, similar effects
were not seen in the rats receiving the compound via the dermal route
indicating poor dermal absorption. Also, no developmental endpoints of
concern were evident due to the lack of developmental toxicity in
either rat or rabbit studies. This risk is considered to be negligible.
    3. Chronic toxicity. EPA has established the chronic population
adjusted dose (cPAD) for tebufenozide at 0.018 mg/kg/day. This
reference dose (RfD) is based on a NOAEL of 1.8 mg/kg/day and an
uncertainty factor (UF) of 100. The NOAEL was established from the
chronic toxicity study in dogs where the NOAEL was 1.8 mg/kg/day based
on growth retardation, alterations in hematology parameters, changes in
organ weights, and histopathological lesions in the bone, spleen and
liver at 8.7 mg/kg/day. EPA determined that the 10x factor to protect
children and infants (as required by FQPA) should be reduced to 1x.
Therefore, the cPAD is the same as the RfD: 0.018 mg/kg/day.
    4. Carcinogenicity. Tebufenozide has been classified as a Group E,
"no evidence of carcinogenicity for humans," chemical by EPA.

C. Exposures and Risks

    1. Dietary-- i. From food and feed uses. Tolerances have been
established (40 CFR 180.482) for the residues of tebufenozide, in or on
a variety of raw agricultural commodities. In today's action tolerances
will be established for the residues of tebufenozide in or on the tree
nut crop group including pistachios at 0.1 ppm, and on almond hulls at
25.0 ppm. Risk assessments were conducted by EPA to assess dietary
exposures from tebufenozide as follows:
    Section 408(b)(2)(F) 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
under estimate 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 percent crop
treated (PCT) as required by section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require
registrants to submit data on PCT.
    a. Acute exposure and risk. Acute dietary 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. Neither neurotoxicity nor systemic
toxicity was observed in rats given a single oral administration of
tebufenozide at 0, 500, 1,000 or 2,000 mg/kg. No maternal or
developmental toxicity was observed following oral administration of
tebufenozide at 1,000 mg/kg/day (Limit-Dose) during gestation to
pregnant rabbits. This risk is considered to be negligible.
    b. Chronic exposure and risk. In conducting the DEEM (Dietary
Exposure Evaluation Model) analysis for chronic exposure to and risk
from tebufenozide residues in food, the Agency used tolerance level
residues and some PCT (Tier 2). For the subject crops, the tolerances
used are: 0.1 ppm for tree nuts (including pistachios) and 25.0 ppm for
almond hulls. The analysis evaluates individual food consumption as
reported by respondents in the USDA, Continuing Surveys of Food Intake
by Individuals conducted in 1989 through 1992. Summaries of the
exposures and their representations as percentages of the cPAD for the
general population and subgroups of interest are presented in Table 1.

 Table 1. Chronic Exposure Analysis by the DEEM System for Tebufenozide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Exposure (mg/kg/
       Population subgroup               day)                cPAD%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. population (48 continguous   0.0026............  14%
 states).
Non-nursing infants (<1 years     0.0097............  54%
 old).
Females (13+/nursing)...........  0.0024............  13%
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the table, "cPAD%" means cPAD% = Exposure x 100% divide by
cPAD.
    The subgroups listed above are: (1) The U.S. population (48
continguous states ); (2) highest exposed population subgroup that
includes infants and children; and (3) females 13+.
    This chronic dietary (food only) risk assessment should be viewed
as conservative. Further refinement using anticipated residue values
and additional PCT information would result in a lower estimate of
chronic dietary exposure from food.
    The estimates of PCT were used as follows. In all cases the maximum
estimates were used.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Crop                      Average             Maximum
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almonds.........................   <1%..............   <1%
Apples..........................   1%...............   2%
Beans/Peas, Dry.................   0%...............   1%
Cabbage, Fresh..................   2%...............   3%
Cole Crops......................   1%...............   2%
Cotton..........................   1%...............   4%
Spinach, Fresh..................   2%...............   3%
Spinach, Processed..............   20%..............   29%
Sugarcane.......................   3%...............   5%
Walnuts.........................   10%..............   16%
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ii. From drinking water-- a. Acute exposure and risk. Because no
acute dietary endpoint was determined, the Agency concludes that there
is a reasonable certainty of no harm from acute exposure from drinking
water.
    b.Chronic exposure and risk. The Agency calculated the Tier I
Estimated Environmental Concentrations (EECs) for tebufenozide using
generic expected environmental concentration (GENEEC) (surface water)
and screening concentration in ground water (SCI-GROW) (ground water)
models for use in the human health risk assessment. For chronic
exposure, the worst case EECs for surface water and ground water

[[Page 33476]]

were 16.5 parts per billion (ppb) and 1.04 ppb, respectively. These
values represent upper-bound estimates of the concentrations that might
be found in surface and ground water. These modeling data were compared
to the chronic drinking water levels of comparison (DWLOC) for
tebufenozide in ground and surface water (SOP for Drinking Water
Exposure and Risk Assessments, November 20, 1997).
    For purposes of chronic risk assessment, the estimated maximum
concentration for tebufenozide in surface and ground waters (16.5
ppb=16.5 μg/L) was compared to the back-calculated human health
DWLOCs for the chronic (non-cancer) endpoint. These DWLOCs for various
population categories are summarized in Table 2.

               Table 2. Drinking Water Levels of Comparison for Chronic Exposure to Tebufenozide *1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     EEC *7 calc.
                                                Chronic RfD      Food      Max. water   DWLOC *4,5,6  max.

             Population Category *2              (mg/kg/day)    exposure    exposure*3*   (μg/m >g/L)
                                                              (mg/kg/day)  (mg/kg/day)       L)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. population (48 continguous states)......        0.018       0.0026       0.0154           540          16.5
Females (13+ years)..........................        0.018       0.0024       0.0156           470          16.5
Non-nursing infants (<1 year)................        0.018       0.0097       0.0083            83         16.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Values are expressed to 2 significant figures.
\2\Within each of these categories, the subgroup with the highest food exposure was selected.
\3\Maximum water exposure (chronic) (mg/kg/day) = Chronic PAD (mg/kg/day)--Food exposure (mg/kg/day).
\4\DWLOC(μg/L) = Max. water exposure (mg/kg/day) x body wt (kg) / [(10**-3 mg/μg) x water
  consumed daily (L/day)].
\5\HED Default body weights are: General U.S. population, 70 kg; females (13+ years old), 60 kg; other adult
  populations, 70 kg; and, all infants/children, 10 kg.
\6\HED Default daily drinking rates are 2 L/day for adults and 1 L/day for children.
\7\EEC: Estimated Environmental Concentration. (Chronic 56-day value).

    2. From non-dietary exposure. There is a potential for occupational
exposure to tebufenozide during mixing, loading, and application
activities. However, the Agency did not identify dermal or inhalation
endpoints for tebufenozide and determined that risks from these routes
of exposure are negligible.
    3. Cumulative exposure to substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) 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 tebufenozide has a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances or how to include this pesticide in a cumulative risk
assessment. Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a
cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity,
tebufenozide 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 tebufenozide 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 final rule

for Bifenthrin Pesticide Tolerances (62 FR 62961, November 26, 1997).

D. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety for U.S. Population

    1. Acute risk. The Agency did not identify an acute dietary
toxicological endpoint, therefore, the risk from this route of exposure
is negligible.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described above,
and taking into account the completeness and reliability of the
toxicity data, the Agency has concluded that dietary (food only)
exposure to tebufenozide will utilize 14% of the cPAD for the U.S.
population, and 54% of the cPAD for the most highly exposed population
subgroup (non- nursing infants <1 yr). EPA generally has no concern for
exposures below 100% of the cPAD. Submitted environmental fate studies
suggest that tebufenozide is moderately persistent to persistent and
mobile; thus, tebufenozide could potentially leach to ground water and
runoff to surface water under certain environmental conditions. The
modeling data for tebufenozide indicate levels less than the Agency's
DWLOCs. There are no chronic non- occupational/residential exposures
expected for tebufenozide. Therefore, the Agency concludes that there
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to adults, infants
and children from chronic aggregate exposure to tebufenozide residues.
    3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. There are potential non-
occupational/residential short-term post application exposures
(incidental non-dietary ingestion) to toddlers from the use of
tebufenozide on ornamentals. However, since the Agency did not identify
acute dietary endpoint, the short-term post application exposure risk
assessment is expected to be negligible. Intermediate-term incidental
non-dietary exposures are not expected.
    4. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
from aggregate exposure to tebufenozide residues.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety for Infants and Children

    1. Safety factor for infants and children. In assessing the
potential for additional sensitivity of infants and children to
residues of tebufenozide, EPA considered data from developmental
toxicity studies in the rat and rabbit and a 2-generation reproduction
study in the rat. The developmental toxicity studies are designed to
evaluate adverse effects on the developing organism resulting from
maternal pesticide exposure gestation. Reproduction studies provide
information relating to effects from exposure to the pesticide on the
reproductive capability of mating animals and data on systemic
toxicity.
    FFDCA section 408 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 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 margin of exposure (MOE) analysis or through
using uncertainty (safety) factors in calculating a dose level that
poses no appreciable risk to humans. EPA

[[Page 33477]]

believes that reliable data support using the standard uncertainty
factor (usually 100 for combined interspecies and intraspecies
variability) and not the additional tenfold MOE/uncertainty factor when
EPA has a complete data base under existing guidelines and when the
severity of the effect in infants or children or the potency or unusual
toxic properties of a compound do not raise concerns regarding the
adequacy of the standard MOE/safety factor.
    2. Conclusion. There is a complete toxicity data base for
tebufenozide and exposure data are complete or are estimated based on
data that reasonably accounts for potential exposures. For the reasons
summarized above, the Agency concludes that an additional safety factor
is not needed to protect the safety of infants and children.
    3. Acute risk. Since no acute toxicological endpoints were
established, it is unlikely that acute aggregate risk exists.
    4. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described above,
and taking into account the completeness and reliability of the
toxicity data, the Agency has concluded that dietary (food only)
exposure to tebufenozide will utilize 14% of the cPAD for the U.S.
population, and 54% of the cPAD for the most highly exposed population
subgroup (non-nursing infants <1 yr). EPA generally has no concern for
exposures below 100% of the cPAD. Despite the potential for exposure to
tebufenozide in drinking water and from non-dietary, non- occupational
exposure, EPA does not expect the aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of
the RfD.
    5. Short- or intermediate-term risk. Short- and intermediate-term
risks are judged to be negligible due to the lack of significant
toxicological effects observed.
    6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result
to infants and children from aggregate exposure to tebufenozide
residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Metabolism in Plants and Animals

    1. Nature of the residue--Plants. The qualitative nature of the
residue in plants is adequately understood based upon acceptable apple,
sugar beet, and rice metabolism studies. The Agency has concluded that
the residue of regulatory concern is tebufenozide per se.
    2. Nature of the residue--Animal. The results of the ruminant and
poultry metabolism studies have been reviewed by the Agency and the
determination was made that the tebufenozide residues of regulatory
concern in animals are the parent tebufenozide and the four metabolites
designated: RH-2703 [benzoic acid, 3,5-dimethyl-1-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-
2-((4-carboxymethyl)benzoyl)hydrazide], RH-9886 [benzoic acid, 3-
hydroxymethyl,5-methyl-1-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-2-(4-
ethylbenzoyl)hydrazide], the stearic acid conjugate of RH-9886, and RH-
0282 [benzoic acid, 3-hydroxymethyl-5-methyl-1-(1,1- dimethylethyl)-2-
(4-(1-hydroxyethyl) benzoyl)hydrazide].

B. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    1. Analytical methods--Plant tissues. The Rohm and Haas method TR
34-95- 20, with minor modifications, was used to determine tebufenozide
residue levels in/on pecans and almonds (MRID 44414304). This method
has been validated by EPA and was submitted to the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) for inclusion in PAM II. The method limit of
quantitation (LOQ) and limit of detection (LOD) for tebufenozide are
0.01 ppm and 0.003 ppm, respectively.
    2. Analytical methods--Animal tissues. A submitted HPLC/UV Method,
Rohm and Haas Method TR 34-96-109, has been determined to be adequate
for collecting data on residues of tebufenozide in animal tissues. The
validated LOQ for tebufenozide in animal tissue is 0.02 ppm. The LOQ
for each of the metabolites studied are as follows: RH-2703 in liver,
0.02 ppm; RH-9886 and RH-0282 in meat, 0.02 ppm; RH-9526 in fat, 0.02
ppm. The LODs for the analytes are 0.006 ppm in tissues.
    3. Multi-residue methods. Rohm and Haas has previously submitted
data involving multi-residue method testing.
    Adequate enforcement methodology (example--gas chromatography) is
available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be
requested from: Calvin Furlow, PRRIB, IRSD (7502C), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (703)
305-5229; e-mail address: furlow.calvin@epa.gov.

C. Magnitude of Residues

    1. The petitioner submitted data from tests on pecans, almonds, and
almond hulls. A bridging study was also submitted showing that there
were no differences in the amount of RH-5992 residues on pecans
(nutmeat) from the two formulations. Residues of tebufenozide were
determined in/on nuts harvested 11-14 days following the last of 4
foliar applications of tebufenozide for a total of ∇2.0 lbs
ai/acre per season (1x the proposed seasonal rate). Tebufenozide
residues in/on pecans were below the LOQ of 0.01 ppm: values ranged
from <0.003 ppm (the LOD) to 0.0058 ppm. Tebufenozide residues in/on
almonds were < 0.003-0.052 ppm, and in/on almond hulls were 7.880-19.9
ppm.
    2. The inclusion of pistachios into the tree nut crop group without
a change in the representative crops, pecans and almonds, has been
recommended but has not as yet been published. The submitted pecan,
almond, and almond hull field trial residue studies are adequate to
support the proposed 0.1 ppm tolerance for the tree nut crop group
including pistachios and the 25.0 ppm tolerance for almond hulls.
    3. Processed food/feed. There are no tree nut (including pistachio)
processed commodities of regulatory interest.

D. International Residue Limits

    Codex MRLs have been established for residues of tebufenozide in/on
pome fruit (1.0 ppm), husked rice (0.1 ppm) and walnuts (0.05 ppm).
Tebufenozide is registered in Canada, and a tolerance for residues in/
on apples is established at 1.0 ppm. EPA has set the pome fruit
tolerance at 1.0 ppm to harmonize with the Codex and Canadian levels.

E. Rotational Crop Restrictions

    Since tree nuts and pistachios are perennial crops, rotational crop
restrictions are not required for the tree nut crop group and
pistachios.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, the tolerances are established for residues of
tebufenozide, in or on the tree nut crop group (including pistachios)
at 0.1 ppm, and on almond hulls at 25 ppm.

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. The 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 of 1996, EPA will continue to use those
procedures, with appropriate adjustments, until the necessary
modifications can be made. The new section 408(g) provides essentially
the same process for persons to "object" to a regulation for an

[[Page 33478]]

exemption from the requirement of a tolerance issued by EPA under new
section 408(d), as was provided in the old FFDCA sections 408 and 409.
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 control number OPP-300999 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 July 24,
2000.
    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 issue(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 (1900),
Environmental Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. You may also deliver your request to
the Office of the Hearing Clerk in Rm. C400, Waterside Mall, 401 M St.,
SW., Washington, DC 20460. 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 (202) 260-4865.
    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, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
    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, Ariel Rios Bldg.,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
    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.2. Mail your
copies, identified by docket control number OPP-300999, to: Public
Information and Records Integrity Branch, Information Resources and
Services Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. In person or by courier, bring a copy to the
location of the PIRIB described in Unit I.B.2. You may also send an
electronic copy of your request via e-mail to: opp-docket@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 file
format 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 one 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 issue(s) in the manner sought
by the requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested (40
CFR 178.32).

VII. Regulatory Assessment Requirements

    This final rule establishes 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). 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 prior consultation as specified by Executive Order
13084, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments (63 FR 27655, May 19, 1998); special considerations as
required by Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or require 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 (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 FFDCA section 408(d), such
as the tolerance in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a
proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not apply. 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

[[Page 33479]]

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 FFDCA section 408(n)(4).

VIII. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    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: May 10, 2000.
James Jones,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as
follows:
    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), (346a) and 371.
    2. In Sec. 180.482, by alphabetically adding the following entries
to the table in paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows.

Sec. 180.482  Tebufenozide; tolerances for residues.

    *    *    *    *    *
    (a) General. (1) ***

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Parts
                           Commodity                               per
                                                                 million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  *        *        *        *        *
Almond hulls...................................................     25

                  *        *        *        *        *
Tree nut crop group including pistachios.......................      0.1

                  *        *        *        *        *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 00-13071 Filed 5-23-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F