This
section
of
the
FEDERAL
REGISTER
contains
regulatory
documents
having
general
applicability
and
legal
effect,
most
of
which
are
keyed
to
and
codified
in
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations,
which
is
published
under
50
titles
pursuant
to
44
U.
S.
C.
1510.

The
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
is
sold
by
the
Superintendent
of
Documents.
Prices
of
new
books
are
listed
in
the
first
FEDERAL
REGISTER
issue
of
each
week.
Rules
and
Regulations
Federal
Register
55261
Vol.
68,
No.
185
Wednesday,
September
24,
2003
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
180
[
OPP
 
2003
 
0269;
FRL
 
7326
 
5]

Cyromazine;
Pesticide
Tolerance
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Final
rule.

SUMMARY:
This
regulation
establishes
tolerances
for
residues
of
cyromazine
in
or
on
leek;
onion,
green;
onion,
potato;
onion,
tree;
onion,
welsh;
shallot,
fresh
leaves;
garlic,
bulb;
garlic,
great­
headed,
bulb;
onion,
dry
bulb;
rakkyo,
bulb;
shallot,
bulb;
vegetable,
brassica,
leafy,
group
5,
except
broccoli;
broccoli;
turnip,
greens;
cabbage,
abyssinian;
cabbage,
seakale;
hanover
salad,
leaves;
kidney
of
cattle,
goat,
hog,
horse,
and
sheep;
and
meat
byproducts,
except
kidney,
of
cattle,
goat,
hog,
horse,
and
sheep.
The
petitioner
has
requested
that
existing
tolerances
for
residues
of
cyromazine
in/
on
dry
bulb
onion
at
2.0
ppm,
green
onion
at
0.1
ppm,
and
mustard
greens
and
cabbage,
Chinese
at
3.0
ppm
be
deleted.
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
of
1996
(
FQPA).
DATES:
This
regulation
is
effective
September
24,
2003.
Objections
and
requests
for
hearings,
identified
by
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0269,
must
be
received
on
or
before
November
24,
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:
Shaja
R.
Brothers,
Registration
Division
(
7505C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001;
telephone
number:
(
703)
308
 
3194;
e­
mail
address:
brothers.
shaja@
epa.
gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

I.
General
Information
A.
Does
this
Action
Apply
to
Me?
You
may
be
potentially
affected
by
this
action
if
you
an
are
agricultural
producer,
food
manufacturer,
and
pesticide
manufacturer.
Potentially
affected
entities
may
include,
but
are
not
limited
to:
 
Industry
(
NAICS
111),
e.
g.,
Crop
production.
 
Industry
(
NAICS
112),
e.
g.,
Animal
production.
 
Industry
(
NAICS
311),
e.
g.,
Food
manufacturing.
 
Industry
(
NAICS
32532),
e.
g.,
Pesticide
manufacturing.
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
 
0269.
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.
To
access
the
OPPTS
Harmonized
Guidelines
referenced
in
this
document,
go
directly
to
the
guidelines
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
opptsfrs/
home/
guidelin.
htm.
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
August
6,
2003
(
68
FR
46616)
(
FRL
 
7319
 
3),
EPA
issued
a
notice
pursuant
to
section
408
of
FFDCA,
21
U.
S.
C.
346a,
as
amended
by
FQPA
(
Public
Law
104
 
170),
announcing
the
filing
of
pesticide
petitions
(
PP
2E6507
and
2E6510)
by
IR
 
4,
681
US
Highway
#
1
South,
New
Brunswick,
NJ
08902
 
3390.
That
notice
included
a
summary
of
the
petitions
prepared
by
Syngenta
Crop
Protection
Incorporated,
the
registrant.
The
petitions
requested
that
40
CFR
180.414
be
amended
by
establishing
tolerances
for
residues
of
the
insecticide,
cyromazine,
(
Ncyclopropyl
1,3,5­
triazine­
2,4,6­
triamine),
in
or
on
the
following
commodities:
leek;
onion,
green;
onion,
potato;
onion,
tree;
onion,
welsh;
and
shallot,
fresh
leaves
at
3.0
parts
per
million
(
ppm)
(
2E6507),
garlic,
bulb;
garlic,
great­
headed,
bulb;
onion,
dry
bulb;
rakkyo,
bulb;
and
shallot,
bulb
at
0.2
ppm
(
2E6507),
vegetable,
brassica,

VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
11:
32
Sep
23,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00001
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
24SER1.
SGM
24SER1
55262
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
185
/
Wednesday,
September
24,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
leafy,
group
5,
except
broccoli
at
10.0
ppm
(
2E6510),
broccoli
at
1.0
ppm,
turnip,
greens;
cabbage,
abyssinian;
cabbage,
seakale;
and
hanover
salad,
leaves
at
10.0
ppm,
and
kidney
of
cattle,
goat,
hog,
horse,
and
sheep
at
0.2
ppm,
and
meat
byproducts,
except
kidney,
of
cattle,
goat,
hog,
horse,
and
sheep
at
0.05
ppm
(
2E6510).
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
(
62
FR
62961,
November
26,
1997)
(
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
residues
of
cyromazine
on
leek;
onion,
green;
onion,
potato;
onion,
tree;
onion,
welsh;
and
shallot,
fresh
leaves
at
3.0
ppm,
garlic,
bulb;
garlic,
great­
headed,
bulb;
onion,
dry
bulb;
rakkyo,
bulb;
and
shallot,
bulb
at
0.2
ppm,
vegetable,
brassica,
leafy,
group
5,
except
broccoli
at
10.0
ppm,
broccoli
at
1.0
ppm,
turnip,
greens;
cabbage,
abyssinian;
cabbage,
seakale;
and
hanover
salad,
leaves
at
10.0
ppm,
and
kidney
of
cattle,
goat,
hog,
horse,
and
sheep
at
0.2
ppm,
and
meat
byproducts,
except
kidney,
of
cattle,
goat,
hog,
horse,
and
sheepat
0.05
ppm.
EPA's
assessment
of
exposures
and
risks
associated
with
establishing
the
tolerances
follow.

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
cyromazine
are
discussed
in
Table
1
of
this
unit
as
well
as
the
no­
observed­
adverse­
effect­
level
(
NOAEL)
and
the
lowest­
observedadverse
effect­
level
(
LOAEL)
from
the
toxicity
studies
reviewed.

TABLE
1.
 
SUBCHRONIC,
CHRONIC,
AND
OTHER
TOXICITY
Guideline
No.
Study
Type
Results
870.3100
Subchronic
oral­
Dog
The
systemic
toxicity
LOAEL
is
1,000
ppm
(
25
mg/
kg/
day)
based
on
alteration
in
liver
weight
in
males.
The
systemic
toxicity
NOAEL
is
300
ppm
(
7.5
mg/
kg/
day).

870.3100
Subchronic
oral­
Rat
The
systemic
toxicity
LOAEL
is
300
ppm
(
30
mg/
kg/
day),
based
on
alteration
in
the
liver
weight
changes
in
males.
The
systemic
toxicity
NOAEL
is
30
ppm
(
3
mg/
kg/
day).

870.3200
21­
day
dermal
toxicity­
Rabbit
No
treatment
related
systemic
toxicity
was
noted.
The
systemic
toxicity
NOAEL
>
2,000
mg/
kg/
day.
The
systemic
toxicity
LOAEL
>
2,000
mg/
kg/
day.
No
dermal
irritation
was
noted.
The
dermal
toxicity
NOAEL
>
2,000
mg/
kg/
day.
The
dermal
toxicity
LOAEL
>
2,000
mg/
kg/
day.

870.3200
21­
day
dermal
toxicity­
Rabbit
No
treatment
related
systemic
toxicity
was
noted.
The
systemic
toxicity
NOAEL
>
2,010
mg/
kg/
day.
The
systemic
toxicity
LOAEL
>
2,010
mg/
kg/
day.
No
dermal
irritation
was
noted.
The
dermal
toxicity
NOAEL
>
2,010
mg/
kg/
day.
The
dermal
toxicity
LOAEL
>
2,010
mg/
kg/
day.

870.4100
Chronic
oral
(
6
 
months)­
Dog
The
systemic
toxicity
LOAEL
is
3,000
ppm
(
75
mg/
kg/
day)
based
on
alteration
in
hematological
parameters
(
hemoglobin,
and
hematocrit).
The
systemic
toxicity
NOAEL
is
300
ppm
(
7.5
mg/
kg/
day).

870.4300
Combine
Chronic/
Carcinogenicity
Rat
The
systemic
toxicity
LOAEL
is
300
ppm
(
15
mg/
kg/
day)
based
on
decreased
body
weight.
The
systemic
toxicity
NOAEL
is
30
ppm.
(
1.5
mg/
kg/
day).
There
is
no
evidence
of
carcinogenicity.

870.4200
Carcinogenicity­
Mouse
The
systemic
toxicity
LOAEL
is
1,000
ppm
(
150
mg/
kg/
day)
based
on
decreased
body
weight.
The
systemic
toxicity
NOAEL
is
50
ppm.
(
7.5
mg/
kg/
day).
There
is
no
evidence
of
carcinogenicity.

VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
11:
32
Sep
23,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00002
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
24SER1.
SGM
24SER1
55263
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
185
/
Wednesday,
September
24,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
1.
 
SUBCHRONIC,
CHRONIC,
AND
OTHER
TOXICITY
 
Continued
Guideline
No.
Study
Type
Results
870.3700
Developmental
toxicity­
Rabbit
The
maternal
toxicity
LOAEL
is
30
mg/
kg/
day,
based
on
reduced
body
weight
gain
and
food
consumption.
The
maternal
toxicity
NOAEL
is
10
mg/
kg/
day.
The
developmental
toxicity
LOAEL
was
not
established.
The
developmental
toxicity
NOAEL
>
60
mg/
kg/
day
(
HDT).

870.3700
Developmental
toxicity­
Rat
The
maternal
toxicity
LOAEL
is
300
mg/
kg/
day,
based
on
clinical
signs
(
red
or
clear
nasal
discharge)
and
decreased
body
weights.
The
maternal
toxicity
NOAEL
=
100
mg/
kg/
day.
The
developmental
toxicity
LOAEL
is
600
mg/
kg/
day
(
HDT),
based
on
increased
incidence
of
minor
skeletal
variations.
The
developmental
toxicity
NOAEL
is
300
mg/
kg/
day.

870.3800
Two­
generation
reproduction
Rat
The
parental
systemic
toxicity
LOAEL
is
3,000
ppm
(
150
mg/
kg/
day)
based
on
decreased
body
weights
that
were
associated
with
decreased
food
efficiency.
The
parental
systemic
toxicity
NOAEL
is
1,000
ppm
(
50
mg/
kg/
day).
The
offspring
systemic/
developmental
toxicity
LOAEL
is
3,000
ppm
(
150
mg/
kg/
day),
based
on
decreased
body
weights
at
birth
and
through
weaning.
The
systemic/
developmental
toxicity
NOAEL
is
1,000
ppm
(
50
mg/
kg/
day).
No
effects
were
noted
on
reproductive
parameters
and
no
reproductive
toxicity
LOAEL
was
determined.
The
reproductive
toxicity
NOAEL
is
 
3,000
ppm
(
150
mg/
kg/
day).

870.7485
Metabolism­
Rat
Cyromazine
was
well
absorbed
after
oral
administration.
Excretion
was
rapid
at
the
dose
(
3
mg/
kg),
but
an
apparent
delay
in
excretion
occurred
at
the
high
dose
(
300
mg/
kg).
Fecal
elimination
was
equivalent
among
dose
groups
except
the
high
dose
males,
where
a
greater
percentage
was
eliminated
by
this
route.
The
origin
of
fecal
radioactivity
was
via
biliary
elimination.
Residual
radioactivity
in
tissues
was
minimal
in
all
dose
groups.
Urinary
and
fecal
metabolites
of
14C­
cyromazine
were
isolated
and
identified
by
TLC,
HPLC,
and
GC/
MS.
The
major
compounds
were
the
N­
dealkylated
product
melamine,
hydroxycyromazine,
and
unmetabolized
cyromazine
identified.

870.7600
Dermal
Absorption­
Rat
Absorption
at
10
hrs
=
13
%.
Cyromazine
apparently
rapidly
absorbed
into
the
skin
in
an
inverse
dose
related
manner.
The
absorption
into
the
skin
is
followed
by
a
slower
release
into
the
body.
The
main
route
of
excretion
is
apparently
by
the
urine.
There
is
no
evidence
that
the
compound
is
sequestered
in
the
skin.
Mean
absorption
based
on
blood,
urinary/
fecal
excretion,
and
carcass,
ranged
from
0.6
to
7%
for
animals
sacrificed
at
the
end
of
the
exposure
periods.
For
animals
exposed
for
10
and
24
hours
and
followed
for
48
hours
post­
exposure,
mean
absorption
ranged
from
8
to
14.5%.
Total
radioactivity
absorbed
generally
decreased
as
dose
increased
indicating
saturation
of
absorption
with
increasing
dose.
Amounts
remaining
in/
on
the
skin
at
termination
ranged
from
4.5%
(
10
mg
dose/
2
h
exposure)
to
24%
(
0.1
mg
dose/
24
hour
exposure).
The
majority
of
the
absorbed
radioactivity
was
found
in
the
urine
and
carcass.
Most
of
the
unabsorbed
radioactivity
was
found
in
the
skin
washes
from
each
dose/
duration.

870.7600
Dermal
Absorption­
Rat
Absorption
at
10
hrs
=
10%.
Mean
total
recoveries
of
applied
radioactivity
from
all
dose
groups
ranged
from
85
to
101%.
Mean
absorption
based
on
blood,
urinary/
fecal
excretion,
and
carcass,
ranged
from
2%
to
11%.
Total
radioactivity
absorbed
generally
increased
with
increasing
exposure
time
but
decreased
with
increasing
dose
indicating
saturation
of
penetration
with
increasing
dose.
The
majority
of
the
absorbed
radioactivity
was
found
in
the
urine
and
carcass.
Most
of
the
unabsorbed
radioactivity
was
found
in
the
skin
washes
from
each
dose/
duration
(
35
 
90%).
However,
based
on
measurements
of
skin
absorption,
a
significant
amount
of
radioactive
dose
was
also
found
in
the
skin
itself
(
9
 
40%).
Mean
absorption
with
inclusion
of
radioactivity
in
dissolved
skin
ranged
from
10
to
45%.
The
ratio
of
the
amount
of
radioactive
dose
in
the
skin
wash
to
the
radioactivity
in
the
skin
itself
decreased
with
time
indicating
penetration
into
the
subsurface
of
the
skin
with
time
after
treatment.

870.5395
Gene
mutation
in
Hamster
(
Chinese)­
Mutagenic­
Nucleus
Anomaly
Negative
mutagen.

870.5100
Mutagenic­
Point
Mutation
Salmonella
typhimurium
Negative
results
for
point
mutations
in
TA1537,
TA1537,
TA98,
and
TA100
with
and
without
activation.

870.5450
Mutagenic­
Dominant
lethal
test
species:
Mouse
Negative
mutagen.

VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
11:
32
Sep
23,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00003
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
24SER1.
SGM
24SER1
55264
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
185
/
Wednesday,
September
24,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
B.
Toxicological
Endpoints
The
dose
at
which
no
adverse
effects
are
observed
(
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
lowest
dose
at
which
adverse
effects
of
concern
are
identified
(
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
intra
species
differences.
For
dietary
risk
assessment
(
other
than
cancer)
the
Agency
uses
the
UF
to
calculate
an
acute
or
chronic
reference
dose
(
acute
RfD
or
chronic
RfD)
where
the
RfD
is
equal
to
the
NOAEL
divided
by
the
appropriate
UF
(
RfD
=
NOAEL/
UF).
Where
an
additional
safety
factors
(
SF)
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
SF.
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
cyromazine
used
for
human
risk
assessment
is
shown
is
shown
in
Table
2
of
this
unit:

TABLE
2.
 
SUMMARY
OF
TOXICOLOGICAL
DOSE
AND
ENDPOINTS
FOR
CYROMAZINE
FOR
USE
IN
HUMAN
RISK
ASSESSMENT
Exposure
Scenario
Dose
Used
in
Risk
Assessment
UF
Special
FQPA
SF
and
Level
of
Concern
for
Risk
Assessment
Study
and
Toxicological
Effects
Acute
Dietary
(
All
populations)
NA
NA
An
appropriate
endpoint
attributable
to
a
single
dose
(
exposure)
of
cyromazine
was
not
observed
in
oral
toxicity
studies.
Thus,
an
acute
dietary
endpoint
was
not
chosen.

Chronic
Dietary
(
All
populations)
NOAEL=
7.5
mg/
kg/
day
UF
=
100
Chronic
RfD
=
NOAEL/
UF
=
0.075
mg/
kg/
day
FQPA
SF
=
1x
cPAD
=
chronic
RfD
÷
FQPA
SF
=
0.075
mg/
kg/
day
Chronic
Oral
Toxicity
in
Dogs.
LOAEL
=
75
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
alterations
in
hematological
parameters
[
hematocrit
and
hemoglobin
(
males)],
decreased
body
weight/
body
weight
gain
and
increases
in
several
organ
weights.

Short­
Term
Incidental
Oral
(
1
 
30
days)
NOAEL
=
10
mg/
kg/
day
Residential
LOC
for
MOE
=
100
Developmental
Toxicity
study
in
rabbits.
LOAEL
=
30
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
decreases
in
body
weight
gain
and
food
consumption.

Intermediate­
Term
Incidental
Oral
(
1
 
6
months)
NOAEL
=
7.5
mg/
kg/
day
Residential
LOC
for
MOE
=
100
Chronic
Oral
Toxicity
in
Dogs.
LOAEL
=
75
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
alterations
in
hematological
parameters
[
hematocrit
and
hemoglobin
(
males)],
decreased
body
weight/
body
weight
gain
and
increases
in
several
organ
weights.

Short­,
Intermediate­
and
Long­
Term
Dermal
NA
NA
No
hazard
was
identified
via
the
dermal
route
of
exposure.

Short­
Term
Inhalation
(
1
to
30
days)
Inhalation
(
oral)
study
NOAEL
=
10
mg/
kg/
day
(
inhalation
absorption
rate
=
100%)
Residential
LOC
for
MOE
=
100
Chronic
Oral
Toxicity
in
Dogs.
LOAEL
=
75
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
alterations
in
hematological
parameters
[
hematocrit
and
hemoglobin
(
males)],
decreased
body
weight/
body
weight
gain
and
increases
in
several
organ
weights.

Intermediate­
Term
Inhalation
(
1
to
6
months)
Inhalation
(
or
oral)
study
NOAEL
=
7.5
mg/
kg/
day
(
inhalation
absorption
rate
=
100%)
Residential
LOC
for
MOE
=
100
Chronic
Oral
Toxicity
in
Dogs.
LOAEL
=
75
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
alterations
in
hematological
parameters
[
hematocrit
and
hemoglobin
(
males)],
decreased
body
weight/
body
weight
gain
and
increases
in
several
organ
weights.

VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
11:
32
Sep
23,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00004
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
24SER1.
SGM
24SER1
55265
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
185
/
Wednesday,
September
24,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
TABLE
2.
 
SUMMARY
OF
TOXICOLOGICAL
DOSE
AND
ENDPOINTS
FOR
CYROMAZINE
FOR
USE
IN
HUMAN
RISK
ASSESSMENT
 
Continued
Exposure
Scenario
Dose
Used
in
Risk
Assessment
UF
Special
FQPA
SF
and
Level
of
Concern
for
Risk
Assessment
Study
and
Toxicological
Effects
Long­
Term
Inhalation
(>
6
months)
Inhalation
(
or
oral)
study
NOAEL
=
7.5
mg/
kg/
day
(
inhalation
absorption
rate
=
100%)
Occupational
LOC
for
MOE
=
100
Residential
LOC
for
MOE
=
100
Chronic
Oral
Toxicity
in
Dogs.
LOAEL
=
75
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
alterations
in
hematological
parameters
[
hematocrit
and
hemoglobin
(
males)],
decreased
body
weight/
body
weight
gain
and
increases
in
several
organ
weights.

Cancer
(
oral,
dermal,
inhalation)
NA
NA
Group
E
carcinogen
­
evidence
of
non­
carcinogenicity
for
humans.

C.
Exposure
Assessment
1.
Dietary
exposure
from
food
and
feed
uses.
Tolerances
have
been
established
(
40
CFR
180.414)
for
the
residues
of
cyromazine,
in
or
on
the
following
raw
agricultural
commodities:
dry
bean,
except
cowpea,
cabbage,
chinese;
mustard
greens,
mango,
potato,
leafy
vegetables
(
except
Brassica)
group,
cucurbit
vegetables
group,
tomato,
onions,
mushroom,
lima
beans
and
pepper.
Cyromazine
tolerances
are
established
for
milk
and
tissues
of
cattle,
goat,
hog,
horse,
and
sheep
as
a
result
of
feeding
cyromazine
treated
feed
items.
Rotational
crop
tolerances
are
established
for
sweet
corn,
radishes,
and
cotton.
Additionally,
cyromazine
is
registered
for
use
as
a
feed
through
treatment
for
poultry
for
the
control
of
flies
and
maggots
in
poultry
manure.
As
a
result
of
the
feed­
through
use,
tolerances
are
established
for
residues
of
cyromazine
in
egg
and
poultry
tissues.
Risk
assessments
were
conducted
by
EPA
to
assess
dietary
exposures
from
cyromazine
in
food
as
follows:
i.
Acute
exposure.
Quantitative
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
one
day
or
single
exposure.
For
this
assessment,
an
appropriate
endpoint
attributable
to
a
single
dose
(
exposure)
of
cyromazine
was
not
observed
in
oral
toxicity
studies.
ii.
Chronic
exposure.
In
conducting
this
acute
dietary
risk
assessment
EPA
used
the
Dietary
Exposure
Evaluation
Model
software
with
the
Food
Commodity
Intake
Database
(
DEEMFCIDTM
which
incorporates
food
consumption
data
as
reported
by
respondents
in
the
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
chronic
exposure
assessment:
An
unrefined
chronic
exposure
analysis
(
Tier
1)
was
conducted
for
cyromazine
using
the
DEEM
software.
The
assumptions
of
the
chronic
dietary
exposure
assessment
are
tolerance­
level
residues
and
one
hundred
percent
croptreated
iii.
Cancer.
Cyromazine
is
classified
as
a
Group
E
carcinogen
(
evidence
of
non­
carcinogenicity
for
humans),
and
was
shown
not
to
be
carcinogenic
in
mice
or
rats
following
long­
term
dietary
administration.
The
available
mutagenicity
data
suggest
that
cyromazine
does
not
have
genotoxic
activity.
2.
Dietary
exposure
from
drinking
water.
The
Agency
lacks
sufficient
monitoring
exposure
data
to
complete
a
comprehensive
dietary
exposure
analysis
and
risk
assessment
for
cyromazine
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
cyromazine.
The
Agency
uses
the
FQPA
Index
Reservoir
Screening
Tool
(
FIRST)
or
the
Pesticide
Root
Zone
model/
Exposure
Analysis
Modeling
System
(
PRZM/
EXAMS),
to
produce
estimates
of
pesticide
concentrations
in
an
index
reservoir.
The
SCI­
GROW
model
is
used
to
predict
pesticide
concentrations
in
shallow
groundwater.
For
a
screeninglevel
assessment
for
surface
water
EPA
will
use
FIRST
(
a
tier
1
model)
before
using
PRZM/
EXAMS
(
a
tier
2
model).
The
FIRST
model
is
a
subset
of
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
model
that
uses
a
specific
high­
end
runoff
scenario
for
pesticides.
FIRST
and
PRZM/
EXAMS
incorporate
an
index
reservoir
environment,
and
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
screen
for
sorting
out
pesticides
for
which
it
is
unlikely
that
drinking
water
concentrations
would
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
cyromazine
they
are
further
discussed
in
the
aggregate
risk
sections
in
Unit
III.
E.
In
soil,
cyromazine
is
stable
to
hydrolysis
and
photolysis
and
is
rather
persistent
in
aerobic
soil
(
half­
life
value
of
150
days).
The
field
studies
confirmed
this
half­
life
value,
where
average
half­
lives
varied
from
75
days
to
more
than
250
days.
Soil
adsorption
coefficients
are
generally
low.
This
would
indicate
that
cyromazine
has
the
potential
to
leach
through
soils,
especially
sand
and
silt
loam
soils.
The
EECs
for
cyromazine
reflect
six
applications
of
cyromazine
at
0.125
lbs
ai/
A.
For
surface
water,
the
annual
average
of
15.5
µ
g/
L
(
or
ppb)
is
based
on
use
of
the
FIRST
model.
The
groundwater
EEC
of
5.3
µ
g/
L
has
been
estimated
by
the
SCI­
GROW2
program.
Both
of
these
surface
and
groundwater
values
represent
upper­
bound
conservative
estimates
for
concentrations
that
might
be
found
in
VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
11:
32
Sep
23,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00005
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
24SER1.
SGM
24SER1
55266
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
185
/
Wednesday,
September
24,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
surface
water
and
groundwater
due
to
the
use
of
cyromazine.
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).
Cyromazine
is
not
registered
for
use
on
any
sites
that
would
result
in
residential
exposure.
There
are
no
currently
existing
or
proposed
uses
for
cyromazine
in
residential
or
public
sites
and
therefore
no
residential
risk
assessment
was
performed.
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
cyromazine
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
cyromazine
and
any
other
substances
and
cyromazine
does
not
appear
to
produce
a
toxic
metabolite
produced
by
other
substances.
EPA
has
determined,
however,
that
there
is
no
known
mechanism
of
toxicity
that
would
support
grouping
cyromazine
by
a
common
mechanism
with
atrazine,
simazine,
and
cyanazine.
For
the
purposes
of
this
tolerance
action,
therefore,
EPA
has
not
assumed
that
cyromazine
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.
There
is
no
evidence
of
susceptibility
and
no
residual
uncertainties
for
pre­
and
post­
natal
toxicity
resulting
from
exposure
to
cyromazine.
3.
Conclusion.
There
is
a
complete
toxicity
data
base
for
cyromazine
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
reduced
to
1X
because:
 
There
is
no
evidence
of
increased
susceptibility
(
quantitative
or
qualitative)
to
rats
or
rabbits
following
in
utero
exposure
or
post­
natal
exposure
to
rats.
In
the
prenatal
developmental
toxicity
study
in
rats,
the
NOAEL
for
developmental
toxicity
was
higher
than
the
maternal
NOAEL.
In
the
developmental
toxicity
study
in
rabbits,
no
evidence
of
developmental
toxicity
was
noted.
For
developmental
toxicity,
the
NOAEL
was
>
60
mg/
kg/
day
highest
dose
tested
(
HDT).
In
the
two­
generation
reproduction
study
in
rats
no
reproductive
effects
were
observed.
In
this
study,
the
reproductive
NOAEL
is
 
150
mg/
kg/
day
(
HDT).
No
neurotoxic
effects
were
observed
in
the
available
data,
and
there
is
no
requirement
for
a
developmental
neurotoxicity
study.
Further,
exposure
assessments
have
been
conducted
in
a
manner
unlikely
to
underestimate
exposure.
 
The
dietary
drinking
water
assessment
utilizes
water
concentration
values
generated
by
models
and
associated
modeling
parameters
which
are
designed
to
provide
conservative,
health
protective,
high­
end
estimates
of
water
concentrations
which
will
not
likely
be
exceeded.
 
The
dietary
food
exposure
assessment
is
based
on
current
and
proposed
registrations
and
is
completely
unrefined
(
i.
e.
tolerance
level
residues
and
100%
crop
treated).
The
dietary
exposure
analysis
will
not
underestimate
exposure/
risk.
 
No
residual
uncertainties
were
identified
in
the
exposure
database.
 
There
are
no
residential
uses
for
cyromazine.
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
the
USEPA
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
groundwater
are
less
than
the
calculated
DWLOCs,
OPP
concludes
with
reasonable
certainty
that
exposures
to
the
pesticide
in
drinking
water
(
when
considered
along
with
other
sources
of
exposure
for
which
OPP
has
reliable
data)
would
not
result
in
unacceptable
levels
of
aggregate
human
health
risk
at
this
time.
Because
OPP
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,
OPP
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.
An
appropriate
endpoint
attributable
to
a
single
dose
(
exposure)
of
cyromazine
was
not
observed
in
oral
toxicity
studies.
Thus,
an
acute
dietary
endpoint
was
not
chosen,
and
cyromazine
is
not
expected
to
pose
an
acute
risk.

VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
11:
32
Sep
23,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00006
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
24SER1.
SGM
24SER1
55267
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
185
/
Wednesday,
September
24,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
2.
Chronic
risk.
Using
the
exposure
assumptions
described
in
this
unit
for
chronic
exposure,
EPA
has
concluded
that
exposure
to
cyromazine
from
food
will
utilize
8.3%
of
the
cPAD
for
the
U.
S.
population,
5.0%
of
the
cPAD
for
all
infants
(<
1
year
old),
13%
of
the
cPAD
for
children
1
 
2
years
old,
and
7.5%
of
the
cPAD
for
females
13
 
49
years
old.
Based
on
the
use
pattern,
chronic
residential
exposure
to
residues
of
cyromazine
is
not
expected.
In
addition,
there
is
potential
for
chronic
dietary
exposure
to
cyromazine
in
drinking
water.
After
calculating
DWLOCs
and
comparing
them
to
the
EECs
for
surface
and
ground
water,
EPA
does
not
expect
the
aggregate
exposure
to
exceed
100%
of
the
cPAD,
as
shown
in
Table
3
of
this
unit:

TABLE
3.
 
AGGREGATE
RISK
ASSESSMENT
FOR
CHRONIC
(
NON­
CANCER)
EXPOSURE
TO
CYROMAZINE
Population
Subgroup
cPAD
(
mg/
kg/
day)
%
cPAD
(
Food)
Ground
Water
EEC
(
ppb)
Surface
Water
EEC
(
ppb)
Chronic
DWLOC
(
ppb)

General
U.
S.
Population
0.075
8.3
5.3
15.5
2.4
x
103
All
Infants
(<
1
year
old)
0.075
5.0
5.3
15.5
7.1
x
102
Children
1
 
2
years
old
0.075
13
5.3
15.5
6.5
x
102
Females
13
 
49
years
old
0.075
7.5
5.3
15.5
2.1
x
103
3.
Aggregate
cancer
risk
for
U.
S.
population.
Cyromazine
is
not
expected
to
pose
a
cancer
risk
to
humans.
4.
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
cyromazine
residues.

IV.
Other
Considerations
A.
Analytical
Enforcement
Methodology
Methods
AG
 
408
(
HPLC,/
UV)
and
AG
 
417A
(
GLC/
NPD)
are
the
tolerance
enforcement
methods
for
cyromazine
as
published
in
the
Pesticide
Analytical
Manual
(
PAM),
Vol.
II.
These
methods
combined
and
with
minor
modifications
comprise
Method
AG
 
621.
The
residue
data
submitted
in
support
of
these
petitions
were
generated
using
Methods
AG
 
408
and
AG
 
621.
Method
AG
 
621
has
been
adequately
validated
for
use
for
the
determination
of
residues
of
cyromazine
in/
on
bulb
vegetables,
leafy
Brassica
vegetables,
and
turnip
greens.
Method
AG
 
408
is
adequate
for
enforcement
of
the
proposed
tolerance
for
residues
of
cyromazine.
The
method
may
be
requested
from:
Chief,
Analytical
Chemistry
Branch,
Environmental
Science
Center,
701
Mapes
Rd.,
Ft.
Meade,
MD
20755
 
5350;
telephone
number:
(
410)
305
 
2905;
email
address:
residuemethods@
epa.
gov.

B.
International
Residue
Limits
Codex,
Canadian
or
Mexican
Maximum
Residue
Limits
(
MRLs)
are
not
established
for
cyromazine
in/
on
leafy
Brassica
vegetables,
bulb
vegetables,
and
turnip
greens.
Therefore,
no
compatability
problems
exist
for
the
tolerances
established
by
this
rule.
V.
Conclusion
Therefore,
the
tolerances
are
established
for
residues
of
cyromazine,
(
N­
cyclopropyl­
1,3,5­
triazine­
2,4,6­
triamine)
in
or
on
leek;
onion,
green;
onion,
potato;
onion,
tree;
onion,
welsh;
and
shallot,
fresh
leaves
at
3.0
ppm,
garlic,
bulb;
garlic,
great­
headed,
bulb;
onion,
dry
bulb;
rakkyo,
bulb;
and
shallot,
bulb
at
0.2
ppm,
vegetable,
brassica,
leafy,
group
5,
except
broccoli
at
10.0
ppm,
broccoli
at
1.0
ppm,
turnip,
greens;
cabbage,
abyssinian;
cabbage,
seakale;
and
hanover
salad,
leaves
at
10.0
ppm,
and
kidney
of
cattle,
goat,
hog,
horse,
and
sheep
at
0.2
ppm,
and
meat
byproducts,
except
kidney,
of
cattle,
goat,
hog,
horse,
and
sheep
at
0.05
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,
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
 
0269
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
24,
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
VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
11:
32
Sep
23,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00007
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
24SER1.
SGM
24SER1
55268
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
185
/
Wednesday,
September
24,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
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
 
0269,
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
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
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
(
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.

VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
11:
32
Sep
23,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00008
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
24SER1.
SGM
24SER1
55269
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
185
/
Wednesday,
September
24,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
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
part
180
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
180.414
is
amended
as
follows:


a.
By
revising
the
commodities
cattle,
goat,
hog,
horse,
and
sheep
meat
byproducts
in
the
table
in
paragraph
(
a).


b.
By
revising
the
commodities
onion,
dry
bulb
and
onion,
green
in
the
table
in
paragraph
(
a).


c.
By
alphabetically
adding
commodities
in
the
table
in
paragraph
(
a).


d.
By
removing
and
reserving
paragraph
(
c).

§
180.414
Cyromazine;
tolerances
for
residues.

(
a)
*
*
*

Commodity
Parts
per
million
*
*
*
*
*

Broccoli
.....................................
1.0
Cabbage,
abyssinian
................
10.0
Cabbage,
seakale
.....................
10.0
*
*
*
*
*

Cattle,
kidney
............................
0.2
Commodity
Parts
per
million
*
*
*
*
*

Cattle,
meat
byproducts,
except
kidney
....................................
0.05
*
*
*
*
*

Garlic,
bulb
...............................
0.2
Garlic,
great­
headed,
bulb
........
0.2
*
*
*
*
*

Goat,
kidney
.............................
0.2
*
*
*
*
*

Goat,
meat
byproducts,
except
kidney
....................................
0.05
Hanover
salad,
leaves
..............
10.0
*
*
*
*
*

Hog,
kidney
...............................
0.2
*
*
*
*
*

Hog,
meat
byproducts,
except
kidney
....................................
0.05
*
*
*
*
*

Horse,
kidney
............................
0.2
*
*
*
*
*

Horse,
meat
byproducts,
except
kidney
....................................
0.05
*
*
*
*
*

Leek
..........................................
3.0
*
*
*
*
*

Onion,
dry
bulb
.........................
0.2
Onion,
green
.............................
3.0
Onion,
potato
............................
3.0
Onion,
tree
................................
3.0
Onion,
welsh
.............................
3.0
*
*
*
*
*

Rakkyo,
bulb
.............................
0.2
Shallot,
bulb
..............................
0.2
Shallot,
fresh
leaves
.................
3.0
*
*
*
*
*

Sheep,
kidney
...........................
0.2
*
*
*
*
*

Sheep,
meat
byproducts,
except
kidney
............................
0.05
*
*
*
*
*

Turnip,
greens
..........................
10.0
Vegetable,
brassica,
leafy,
group
5,
except
broccoli
.......
10.0
*
*
*
*
*

*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
Tolerances
with
regional
registrations.
[
Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*

[
FR
Doc.
03
 
24012
Filed
9
 
23
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
S
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
180
[
OPP
 
2003
 
0270;
FRL
 
7324
 
5]

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

SUMMARY:
This
regulation
establishes
tolerances
for
combined
residues
of
the
herbicide
sulfentrazone
and
its
metabolites
in
or
on
asparagus;
bean,
lima,
succulent;
cabbage;
corn,
field,
forage;
corn,
field,
grain;
corn,
field,
stover;
horseradish,
roots;
pea
and
bean,
dried
shelled,
except
soybean,
subgroup
6C;
peanut;
peanut,
meal;
peppermint,
tops;
potato;
spearmint,
tops;
sugarcane,
cane;
sugarcane,
molasses;
and
sunflower,
seed.
EPA
is
also
deleting
certain
sulfentrazone
tolerances
that
are
no
longer
needed
as
result
of
this
action.
The
Interregional
Research
Project
Number
4
and
FMC
Corporation
requested
these
tolerances
under
the
Federal
Food,
Drug,
and
Cosmetic
Act
(
FFDCA),
as
amended
by
the
Food
Quality
Protection
Act
of
1996
(
FQPA).
DATES:
This
regulation
is
effective
September
24,
2003.
Objections
and
requests
for
hearings,
identified
by
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2003
 
0270,
must
be
received
on
or
before
November
24,
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:
Hoyt
Jamerson,
Registration
Division
(
7505C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001;
telephone
number:
(
703)
308
 
9368;
e­
mail
address:
jamerson.
hoyt@
epa.
gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

I.
General
Information
A.
Does
this
Action
Apply
to
Me?

You
may
be
affected
by
this
action
if
you
are
an
agricultural
producer,
food
manufacturer,
or
pesticide
manufacturer.
Potentially
affected
categories
and
entities
may
include,
but
are
not
limited
to:
 
Crop
production
(
NAICS
111)
 
Animal
production
(
NAICS
112)
 
Food
manufacturing
(
NAICS
311)
 
Pesticide
manufacturing
(
NAICS
32532)

VerDate
jul<
14>
2003
11:
32
Sep
23,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00009
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
24SER1.
SGM
24SER1
